Lfl 216 

D91 
Copy 1 









^ss^:<2 



^5^ 






"IlIBRARY OF CONGRESL 

{$. 



c 
c 

-I 

c 
c: 



#1 






|, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, f 






ir ex: o 
^ ex::: , c 
T. (TCI r 






^^ 



c:<:<c._ci:<L 


< 


c:^m:m<: 


< 


c;c<cggc:_ 


< 


ciS^'CKM^Z 


< 




< 


C3*CZ<^<^-^^CL^ 


< 


d?'^'<23^<C 


c 


r^^;<r<:^"'" 


c 



4rac 



.<:-^c < 












^TcCl < 









^^'<mC 









c <:ij^ 












ODR PUBLIC SCHOOLS 



ARE THEY FREE FOR ALL, OR ARE THEY NOT? 



A LECTURE 

DELIVERED BY 

HON. EDiMUND F. DUNNE. 

Chief Justice op the Sui'keme Coukt op Arizona, 

IX the hall of the house op EEPRESEXTATIVES of the TEIlRlTOiaAI. 
legislature AT TUCSON, ARIZONA, FEBRUARY Sd, 187i5. 



SECoisTD IS. niTia ]sr . 



NEW YORK : 
JBLISHED ijv T. D. EGAN, '67 Barclay Street 

1875. 
[rublishea by Penuission.j 



u^ 



3]^( 



INTRODUCTORY REMARKS. 



It is with pleasure that the publisher of this Lecture 
announces the great success its sale has met with, and the 
many strong commendatory expressions his efforts to circulate 
such sound and timely sentiments have elicited. These 
fully warrant him in bringing out this, the second edition, to 
which are added some corrections and alterations, made by 
the distinguished author. ■ 

It is just and proper to say that this lecture was pub- 
lished in pamphlet form in San Francisco, Cal., so that up to 
this, its circulation must have reached about 50,000. 

In the preface to the San Francisco edition, its publish- 
er is pleased to add this: "It is the intention of Judge 
Dunne to deliver a second lecture on this subject soon, 
wherein some of the points barely alluded to in this will 
receive further treatment, — some objections will be considered, 
and many misrepresentations exposed. * "-■'•" * * * 

In granting permission for the publication of a second 
edition of this Lecture, Judge Dunne asks as a favor that all 
who sympathise, in whole or part, with the views herein 
expressed, will be kind enough to forward him everything 
they can in connection with this subject, articles for or against 
the views herein expressed, copies of other lectures, statistics 
on education, in the United States and other countries, etc., 
etc. The impossibility of obtaining these things in Arizona, 
it is hoped, will be sufficient excuse for this request." 

Any documents sent to the publisher of this pamphlet 
will be immediately and gladly forwarded to the distinguished 
Chief Justice. 

T. D. E. 

New York, Nov. 27th, 1875. 



INTRODUCTION. 



[This Lecture was publislied in the San Francisco 
Monitor and in the New York Freeman's Journal. Also in 
two separate editions in pamphlet form in San Francisco, and 
has been so warmly received and so highly commended by prom- 
inent gentlemen of both clergy and laity, that upon the 
request of a large number of intelligent gentlemen, the 
Publisher has been induced to issue it in its present more 
convenient and permanent form, for to supply our calls on 
the Atlantic slope.] 

The occasion of the delivery of this lecture was, that a 
grand ball was gotten up in Tucson during the session of the 
L3gislature there, in January, 1875, to raise funds to start a 
public school building. As Catholics are not allowed their 
share of the school money in Arizona, some of them refused 
to patronize the ball. The result was that the friends of the 
public schools, as now managed, got very much excited and 
made many angry comments upon the conduct of Catholics 
who declined to join in the ball; whereupon Judge Dunne 
asked for the use of the hall of the House to explain the 
reasons for the position taken by the Catholics in the matter. 
Permission was unanimously granted, and nearly every mem- 
ber of both Houses attended the lecture. The hall was filled 
to its utmost capacity by ladies and gentlemen of the vicinity. 
The Eight Rev. J. B. Salpointe, Vicar Apostolic of 
Arizona, was present. 

A day or two after the lecture, a bill was introduced in 
the Legislatui-e providing for corporate schools such as 
Catholics desire. It came within one vote of passing in the 
Council. [See bill at the end of the lecture.] 



LEOTURE. 



At half-past seven o'clock, Judge Dunue came forward and spokf 
as follows : 

Ladies and Gentlemen : — I desire first to thank the memberis ot 
the House of Representatives for their kindness and courtesy in placing 
this hall at my disposal this evening. I hope the use I shall make of it 
will be not unsatisfactory to them in this, that possibly I may be able to 
present a subject of great impoi'tance to our people generally, and to 
them as legislators, in a light in which it has not before been considered 
by them. Next, I wish to thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for this 
unexpectedly large and certainly most flattering response to my invita- 
tion to allow me an opportunity of presenting certain views on this most 
important subject of education. I appreciate this compliment the more 
because there are so many who consider there is no need of any discussion 
on this subject, that they have arranged everything in this matter already, 
and that there is nothing more to be said about it. 

The attitude of one i^ttrty in the discussion in which I shall presently 
engage, reminds me of a cartoon I saw a short time ago in one of the 
London comics. A French company, with French money, after great 
labor, care and expense, built the Suez Canal for the privilege of a toll on 
the tonnage of vessels passing through it. The English merchants 
Ijegan, as the Company thought, to take an unfair advantage in the 
matter of calculating the tonnage; the Company protested, but in vain. 
The Company then declared they would put out the signal-lights along 
the canal, so that it could not be used, until the dispute was adjusted. 
On this, England, as usual, blustered terribly as to the fearful things it 
would do if any action was had to prevent the management of the canal 
in the particular way in which England desired it to be managed. The 
cartoon gave a bird's-eye view of the canal; a signal station in the fore- 
gx-ound ; the President of the French Company mounting a ladder to 
extinguish the light, and the typical John Bull standing below shaking 
his fists and boiling over with rage, shrieking, '• Don't you dare to put 

out those lights, you scoundrel, or I'll !" The Frenchman turns 

with a look of amused astonishment and says, quietly : " Have you zen 
bought ze canal, Monsieur Jean Bull .?" The cartoon brought England 
to its senses, and it then concluded to be a little reasonable and discu-ss 
the question on its merits. 



THE MAJORITY REFUSE TO DISCUSS THE QUESTION. 

Now, there is a gieat deal of this John Bull bluster in the pending 
discussion about an amendment proposed to our school law. There is a 
certain chxss among us which wants the public schools managed in a 
certain way, and this class at the present moment happens to be in the 
majority, and so, under our form of government, is able, for the moment, 
to gratify its desires, and manage things just as it likes. There is a cer- 
tain other and quite numerous class, which says that, while it approves 
of the fundamental idea of providing free schools for educational pur- 
poses, there are some details as to the working of the system which are 
so unsatisfactory, that it can get no benefit at all from the system the 
way it is now worked, and, as parties interested, they propose the amend- 
ments they desire, and ask that they be considered ; that fair and honest 
discussion be had upon them ; and if they can be shown to be in accord, 
ance with reason, good sense, and the general public welfare, that they 
be adopted. How are these propositions received ? Are they listened 
to like any other proposition to amend important public laws ? Are the 
arguments heard and a decision rendered with some reasons assigned for 
the action had in the matter ? By no means ! On this point the present 
accidental majority act very strangely. They immediately fly into a 
passion ; they \Yill hardly allow the proposition to be made ; they don the 
war-paint at once and shriek, " Don't you dare to touch our public schools 
or we'll run you into the sea." Whereupon it seems pertinent to us to 
inquire of this mnjority, " Have you, then, bought the public schools ? 
Are they your schools ? Have we no voice in their management i Have 
we ceased to be citizens of this country, and been relegated to a class, 
whose rights no one is bound to respect ? Have we no longer a voice in 
the making of laws for this Territory? Are we serfs, slaves, vassals— 
from whom taxes may be wrung to support institutions from which, as 
they are now managed, we can derive no benefit, and must not dare open 
our mouths to state what we consider our. grievances, on pain of being 
threatened with exile and death ?" Is not that a strange kind of talk to 
proceed from an accidental majority in a Republican form of govern- 
ment ? And how long is it probable that a majority which talks that 
way can maintain itself? 

THE MAJORITY MUST DISCUSS THE QUESTION. 

There is a real and substantial grievance existing. It bears hard 
upon a large body of people. They are burdened with an annual tax to 
support institutions from which they can derive no benefit. They feel 
that the action of the majority in this case is not only an inroad upon 
their pockets, but an outrage upon their rights. They assert that a 
species of legalized robbery is being perpetrated upon them to an enor- 
mous and unsupportable extent. No outrage of this kind can be perpe- 
trated for any great length of time in a free country. Therefore it is 



useless for the present majority to get into a passion about this matter, 
and try to bully it through. Neither is it entirely in accordance with 
the spirit of our institutions to incite a social war on this question, and 
seek to proscribe, ostracise and malign those who happen to difter in 
opinion from the present majority as to how free schools can be best 
conducted for the general good. This majority talk a great deal about 
the duty of people being liberal in their views ; but what they seem to 
mean is, that the liberality ought to be-all on one side ; that other people 
ought to yield to them in everything. But as to any yielding on their 
part, no ! — not the ninth part of a hair. 

MONARCHISTS SAY KEPUBLICANS CANNOT REASON ! 

Are you (and I speak now to the general majority on this question 
throughout our country) are you, by your action on this matter, disposed 
to confirm the great argument made against our Republican form of 
government by the advocates of monarchy in Europe ? Do you know 
what Lord Brougham, one of the greatest of European political writers, 
says of us on this point ? Listen ; here are his words : " When the pre- 
dominance of one party in a Democracy has once been fully established, 
there is no safety for those who differ with it by ever so light a shade. 
The majority being overwhelming, all opposition is stifled. No man 
dare breathe a whisper against the prevailing sentiments, for the popu- 
lar violence will bear no contradiction. Hence the suppression of whole- 
some advice, the concealment of useful truths. It becomes dangerous to 
declare any opinion, however sound, which is unpalatable to the multi- 
tude. Truth must no more be told to the tyrant of many heads than of 
one. Nay, mere flattery becomes the food generally ofl^ered up ; and he 
who goes before others in the extravagance of his doctrines or the vio- 
lence of his language, outbids his competitors for poi^uiar favor. This 
vile traffic is alike hurtful to the people, and to those who deal in it. 
The former are pampered and spoiled, the latter are degraded and 
debased. * * ^- In the United States, as all travelers are agreed, the 
tyranny of the multitude exceeds the bounds of all moderate popular in- 
fluence. No person dares say anything that thwarts the prevailing 
prejudices, or the popular opinions of the day." (3d Brougham Polit. 
Philos., p. 120.) 

Are you going to admit the truth of all this, by the manner you 
treat our complaints in this matter ? Have you not, to a great extent, 
already done so ? When a man has the hardihood to express his honest 
convictions on this subject, and seeks to give his reasons therefor, do the 
people generally try to consider those reasons, or do they close their ears 
against his argument and begin to abuse him, charging him with being 
a senseless bigot, a secret enemy to the fundamental principles of our 
•government, a traitor at heart, and one against whom the machinery of 
our social organization should be vigorously directed to eflfect his entire 



8 

destruction ? How is it about this ? Are you sure you arc trentiuo- this 
iiatter in accordance with the general spirit of our institutions ? I hope 
you will notice a little the manner in which your neighbors talk and act 
upon this question. If you do, I am confident you will find a great deal 
in the conduct of the majority which, upon candid reflection, you must 
tlioroughly condemn. 

I desire to pay full tribute to the liberal, sincei-e and honest purpose 
of those who have come forward to meet me here to-night. I see here 
many representatives of this majority, whose general action I consider 
5' J much in conflict with the spirit of our institutions ; but those who 
c<:)me here to listen to my arguments take ^ themselves out of the 
r lie of their class. They assert their mental superiority to the 
LKijoiity of that class; they prove themselves true Americans, true 
Republicans, true Democrats ; people worthy of self-government ; people 
who are willing to " hear "^ before they " strike." 

CtEnekal pkopositions stated. 

And now, ladies and gentlemen, let us come to the question. We, 
: :t is, those for whom I now argue, maintain : 

Ixt. That the Sftite ]iu>< no right to tcacli rclUjmi. 

2il. That the State has no right to teach irreWjion. 

'kl. That the State has no inherent right to tearh at all. 

Now, I do not deny that the questions raised are the most serious- 
Lijjs that were ever proposed to the law-making power of any State, and 
th-jrefore I shall, in all subsequent stages of tliis argument — for I expect 
it 10 last for some time — freely admit that tliere is a tremendous conflict 
01 opinion among men in general on these propositions ; and I shall 
patiently listen to every argument produced against them, and so far as 
it naturally becomes incumbent on me, shall do my best to honestly 
!!ii=wer all such arguments ; but I cannot admit that there is any difli- 
eulty about the true decision on one question. I think the truth of the 
pr.>positions will be evident to every person candidly examining the 
subject, and who may be admitted to have a reasonably correct idea of 
w-hat a State is, and what " education " means. Also, I must, in justice 
to my side of the argument, remind you, as you very well know, that I 
could not reasonably be expected to be prepared at this moment for a 
full consideration of so important a question. You know that I have 
very recently come among you ; that I am now engaged in holding a 
session of the Supreme Court ; that this discussion has been suddenly 
precipitated by local action, and that what I say now is almost " off- 
hand," but it will do for a beginning. I will open the argument for you. 
You liave among you the keenest and sharpest intellects in the land, and 
some of them will very probably find some points I have not fully cov- 
ere.l, and I may have to acknowledge a hit, now and then, which will 



require explanation ; Ijut, if I cannot, in the close, make a good case, I 
shall find no fault if you show good reason for 'deciding against me. 
Also, I must necessarily, in the brief time which I can have for setting 
forth our position, often confiue myself to stating what I conceive to be 
the truth in the matter, without fully arguing it. That will come more 
in detail hereafter. 

THE STATE MUST NOT DIRECTLY INTERFERE WITH RELIGIOUS TEACHIN G. 

Now for the first proposition, that the State has no right to teach 
religion. " Oh, we admit that," you will say ; " we will admit that as 
fully as you wish. No need of any discussion about that." Very well ; 
I would be glad to know that you admitted it, and were willing to admit 
it, with all its necestiary consequences. Some people say they fully admit 
a proposition ; but when you make an application of the admission 
which necessarily follows, and which they do not like, they i'go back on 
you," as you say here, and claim that they admitted it, with that quali- 
fication. They will not argue as to whether it necessarily follows, but 
will stolidly maintain that the exception is a part of the general propo- 
sition. They will then neither admit nor deny generally, nor state any 
proposition to ' which they will unqualifiedly adhere. They " stand 
mute.'' In England, they used to have the ^' 'poine forte et dure'' for such 
cases ; and, if there ever was a case where, playfully speaking, its appli- 
cation could be justified, it is where a person pretends to argue, and 
insists upon arguing, and yet will not take any decided ground upon the 
point in issue, as I fear I may have to charge this majority with doing, 
ip some things, before I get through. 

Well, you admit, then, that the State has no right to teach religion. 

THE STATE MUST NOT INDIRECTLY DO THAT WHICH IT IS FORBIDDEN TO 
DO DIKECTLT. ' 

Herein comes our second proposition, that the State has no right to 
teach irreligion — that is, to teach in such a manner as to seriously inter- 
fere with the religious education of the child. Now we come to what 
some people claim to be debatable ground. 

When the public school system of this country was first brought for- 
ward, it was established on the theory that the State had a right to insist 
that the children of the country should receive instruction in virtue, 
morality and knowledge, in order that they might become good citizens. 
You will please notice that virtue and morality were put first, and knowl- 
edge — that is, mere intellectual culture — was put last, as it should have 
been. (See the early State Constitutions on the matter.) 

Under this theory public schools were established, and what were 
claimed by the State to be principles of virtue, morality and general 
knowledge were taught. After a while a great many people became 
dissatisfied with the system, so far as it professed to teach principles of 
virtue, and morality — the most important things. ' Prayers were oft'ered 



10 

up in the 'schools, and versions of the Bible wei'C read and connnented 
upon, by teachers, who had their own views on the subject. Objections 
were made to these comments. To satisfy these objections, a modifica- 
tion of the system was admitted, that hereafter the Bible should be read 
" without note or comment." It ran on for awhile in this way ; but then 
the objection was made that the versions of the Bible read were not true 
versions, and that, therefore, the Bible, truly speaking, was not read, and 
that false notions in religion were thus taught. Then another modifica- 
tion of the system was permitted, which forbade the reading of any ver- 
sion of the Bible whatever. The majority thought that now they had 
got the school law in such shape that all would be satisfied ; but it was 
found that there still remained a large class which claimed that, even 
without any direct teaching of religion, the system as managed had the 
eftect to teach irreligion ; and they asked to be allowed to withdraw 
their children from the so-called public schools, and educate them in 
virtue and morality themselves, in separate schools, and receive their 
proper share of the public money. 

DRAWING THE LIIJE. 

Charles Lamb, dear, delightful Elia, says all people draw the line 
somewhere, and that he believed in drawing it at roast pig ; that roast 
pig was one of the most delicious things in existence, and that any man 
who differed with him as to the primary and paramount excellence of 
roast pig was not to be trusted. Now, right here on this point — the de- 
mand for separate schools, where the principles of virtue and morality 
might be taught in accordance with the wishes of the parents — the pre- 
sent accidental majority concluded to draw the line, and stand upon it ; 
and there's the fight, there's the issue, there's the proposition we have to 
discuss. The present majority declare they will stand or fall by the sys- 
tem on this point ; but while they have the right to say they will stand 
or fall in their support of the system on this point, they have no right nor 
power to say that the system itself shall thug stand or fall. We have a say 
in the matter ourselves, and, if our views prevail, the present majority 
becomes simply a minority, and then " they will know how it is them- 
selves." They will then find that all their talk about ovf people being 
©pposed to the education of the masses, and their people being in favor of 
it, is mere talk. Then, for the first time in their lives, they will be compelled 
to study history ; they will be compelled to prove their case, not assert it 
as they have been doing. They may think they have read history, pro- 
perly speaking, liut they have never done it. They read Macaulay and 
Motley and Froude, and such writers, confessed jjartizans, and think they 
understand the case. They have simply read the brief on their side 
But suppose I should hear the argument on one side only in my Court, 
and decide accordingly, how would you, as a whole, like it, and how 
near do you think I would get to a true understanding of the point in 
issue ? No ; I have to hear both sides. How many of the majority have 



11 

done it on this question r and how do they dare decide without exam- 
ining botli sides ? They would impeach me if I undertook to do it where 
even a paltry hundred dollars was involved ; and in turn, I suppose, I 
may have the liberty of impeaching them, and charging that they will 
be false to their duty, as citizens of this Eepublic, if they dare decide on 
such a momentous issue as this now pending without patiently and rea- 
sonably hearing, and dispassionately considering, the arguments on both 
sides. And if, after such hearing, they fail to d© their best to carry out 
the policy of the law, as indicated by the adoption of the different 
amendments referred to — namely, that, wherever a grievance is shown to 
exist, they should endeavor to so amend the law as to abate such griev- 
ance. It will be a poor argument to say that the law cannot be improved 
upon. Did all wisdom die with the framers of the law as it stands? Is 
there no room for fartlier progress r 

PARAMOpNT IMPORTANCE OP RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION. 

Now, let us look at the line of the argument. Those for whom I 
have, perhaps, rashly, undertaken to speak, claim, first, that education 
means something more than teaching children how to read and write and 
cipher ; that education is a harmonious development of all the faculties 
— moral, mental and physical ; and that of all training in education, the 
moral — that is, religious — training is the most important. 

I know that many dispute this proposition ; but the Book of books, 
whose teachings all among us who recognize any authority at all in re- 
ligious matters reverently accept, proclaims this truth in a tliousand 
ways. It is the Alpha and Omega of the book, and is summed up in the 
phrase, " What shall it jjrofit a man to gain the whole w^orld and lose his 
soul ?" 

If we turn from the pages of inspired wisdom to those writers who 
are guided by reason alone, we find that the greatest men of all ages and 
all civilizations have given their unqualified assent to this proposition. 

"Where the placid waters of the grand Pacific lave the shore of bright 
Cathay, ages and ages ago the words of old Confucius rang out clear and 
strong, that without morality there could be ho society. From thence 
we can make the circuit of the globe, touching all civilization as we pass, 
until we plant our feet again upon our beloved Pacific slope ; and wher- 
ever we look we shall find this doctrine taught by the master minds of 
every age and every clime. 

Away back in the country of the Brahmins, in the Ordinances of 
Menu — claimed to be older than the books of Moses — we find the para- 
mount importance of religious instruction fully recognized. In its 
twelve books, and more than twenty-five hundred sections, it establislies 
the law in all things — divine and human, jjublic and private, civil and 
criminal, social and political — but it treats first of all of the Supreme 
God, next the duty of knowing His law, next the penalty for despisinc 
it." " Whatever man * * shall treat with contempt these two roots 



12 

of the law (Sruti, revelation, and Smriti, tradition,) he must be driven as 
an atheist and a scorner of revelation from the company of the virtuous." 
(Ch. 2, Sec. 11, p. 1-1, Jones' Inst. Hindu Law.) 

Coming a little further West, we find that Zoroaster, the prophet and 
law-giver of tile ancient Persians, in the ^lr^.>«/^a, their book of books, 
lilaces the same doctrine first in importance. In the wilds of Arabia we 
find tlie code of Mahomet, the Koran, given to the world. Every one 
of its ninety-four chapters begins with the words, "In the name of tlie 
most merciful God," and from beginning to end it accords with the doc- 
trines before enounced— so much so, indeed, that we find a great poet 
declaring, in the mellifluous language of the people among whom we are 
here dwelling : 

" No hay mas quo un eolo Dios— dice el Cristiano ; 
No hay otro Dies que Dios— el Afiioano." 

The Hebrew Talmud, in its six principal books, gives precedence to 
religious instruction, as you will find if you consult' either the Palestrin- 
ian or the Babylonian compendium. 

The grandest of the old Pagans, the broad-browed Plato, whose 
genius carried him beyond all the knowledge of his people, gave noble 
testimony in favor of the jjaramount importance of religion, which the 
wisdom of over twenty centuries has not been able to successfully contra- 
dict. He says : " Ignorance of the true God is the greatest pest of all 
republics ; therefore,* whoever destroys religion destroys the foundation 
of all human society." {Lih. X. de Leg.) 

Cicero, of whom comment is unnecessary, was forced to the same 
conclusion. He, too, says on this: "Plato, thou reasonest well." He 
declares " it is necessary that the citizens should be first persuaded of the 
existence of gods, the directors and rulers of all things, in whose hands 
are all events ; who are ever conferring on mankind immense benefits ; 
who search the heart of man ; who see his actions : the spirit of piety 
which he carries into the practice of religion ; and who distinguish the 
life of the pious man from that of the ungodly man." [De nat. <leor. 2.) 

Seneca, too, the great moralist, writes : " The first thing is the wor- 
ship of the gods, and faith in their existence ; we are next to. acknowl- 
edge their majesty and bounty, without which their is no niajesty." 
(Epist. 95.) 

Following civilization in its westward course, let us see what they 
say in France. I could cite a hundred authorities, but I will take one 
almost universally respected in America because of the careful study he 
made of our institutions — De Tocqueville. On this point he says : " Re- 
ligion is no less the comijanion of liberty in all its battles and its tri- 
umphs, the cradle of liberty, and the divine source of its claims. The 
safeguard of morality is religion ; and morality is the best security of 
law, as well as the surest pledge of freedom.' (1 Dem. in Am., p. 44.)- 

What do they say in England ? I shall quote authorities, I am sure, 
few of you will question. Prof. Huxley, whom, certainly, none of you 



13 

will accuse of narrow views in religious matters, says : "I protest that, 
if I thought the alternative were a necessary one, I would rather the 
children of the poor should grow up ignorant of both those mighty arts 
— reading and writing — than that they should remain ignorant of that 
knowledge to which these arts are nieans." (Lay Sermons.) 

Herbert Silencer, one of the shining lights of what radicals call " ad- 
vanced thought," scoffs at the idea that mere intellectual culture can 
make, or does make, good citizens. He says : '• Are not fraudulent bank- 
rupts educated people, the getters-up of bubble companies, and makers 
of adulterated goods, and users of false trade-marks, and retailers Avho 
have light weights, and owners of unseaworthy ships, and those w^ho 
cheat insurance companies, and those who carry on turf chicanery, and 
the great majority of gamblers ? Or, to take a more extreme form ot 
turpitude, is there not among those who have committed murders by 
poison, within our memories, a considerable number of the educated — a 
number bearing as large a ratio to the educated classes as does the total 
number of murderers to the total population ? This belief in the moral- 
izing effect of intellectual culture, flatly contradicted by facts, is absurd 
— a priori. What imaginable connection is there between learning that 
certain clusters of marks on paper stand for certain words, and the get- 
ting of a higher sense of duty ? * * How does the knowledge of the 
multiplication table, or quickness in adding or dividing, so increase the 
sympathies as to restrain the tendency to trespass upon fellow-creatures ? 
* * This irrelation between such causes and such effects is almost as 
great as that between exercise of the fingers and strengthening the legs. 
One who should by lessons in Latin hope to gain a knowledge of geometry, 
or one who should expect practice in drawing to be followed by an expres- 
sive rendering of a sonata, would be thought lit for an asylum; and yet he 
would be scarcely more irrational than are those who, by discipline of 
the intellectual faculties, expect to produce better feelings." (Spencer's 
Sociology.) 

Now, let us follow the Star of Empire across the Atlantic, and we 
shall find the same sentiment re-echoed by the " Father of our Country.'' 
Our own Washington has left us these words of warning : " Let us with 
caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without 
religion ; whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined educa- 
tion on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid 
us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious 
principles." (Farewell Address.) 

We have here an overwhelming amount of authority from the 
teachings of the wisest men of every age, reaching back to the fixrthest 
glimpses we can catch of the dawn of civilization among men, and ex- 
tending down along the path of history in glorious array until we come 
to the days in which we ourselves live, move and have our being. Are 
you willing to turn aside from the aggregated wisdom of the world, and 
throw yourselves into the embrace of a few mad fanatics, who think 



they are wiser than the whole world ; who scoff at the experience of 
ages, and declare that everything is wrong, that everybody has been 
mistaken in everything ever since the world began, and that they are 
the only ones who have any correct idea about anything connected with 
the social order ? Are you ready to admit that, to be right, you must 
reject all the old ideas about Divine authority, reward of industry and 
sanctity of home, and accept instead the proposition that the true idea 
is divinity in majorities, communism in property, and freedom in love ; 
that all authority is in the majority ; that all holding of wordly goods in 
property is theft, and that all holding of wives in marriage is tyranny ? 
Is it possible you are willing to accept propositions which, by necessary 
consequence, lead to these doctrines? The fellows who preach these things 
are generally uneasy spirits, wild Bohemians, reckless devils, who never 
have any property or wives of their own, and who acknowledge no law 
but their own will ; and I can very easily understand why they wish to 
have unlimited license to make as free as they like with the possessions 
of others. But why a serious, practical people, such as Americans claim 
to be, should be found consorting with such a crowd, I do not understand; 
yet they are keeping step with the Communists in the onward march to 
Socialism as faithfully as the latter could wish. All that communists 
ask, is, that the will of the majority shall be the only law, and Americans 
are gradually accepting the principle, and are thereby preparing for 
themselves, in the near future, a struggle for the preservation of the 
American State, compared with which the one we have recently passed 
through would be nearly what a dress parade is to actual war. 

THEORY OF THE MAJORITY AS TO RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION. 

Most of you will probably tell me that you agree with all I say 
about the necessity of religious instruction; but that the only difference 
between us upon that point is as to where it shall be given; that, in your 
opinion, this religious instruction can be given sufficiently well at home, 
and once a week in special schools organized for that purpose, commonly 
called Sunday Schools ; and that the effect of this home and Sunday 
teaching will not be seriously interfered with by sending the child six 
days out of seven to schools where all religious teaching is ignored. Is 
not that a very perfunctory manner of disposing of so important a 
subject? Has not the moral tone of our community, under the operation 
of this theory, already fallen below that standard at which a nation is 
safe even in the hands of its own people? Do we not need more morality 
in the community, more people who believe in God? Are not our public 
men too corrupt? and do they misrepresent the people as much as many 
think? Is there not a screw loose somewhere in our social organization? 
and do yon not think the system of ignoring religious instruction six- 
sevenths of the time in the life of our young people has something to do 
with it? Is not such a consequence the natural out come of such a 
system? Can we maintain our social organization without a high stand- 



15 

arcl of morality ? and do j^ou think we shall get it from a system of god- 
less education ? Can any society keep together long which has not the 
Divine idea at the very centre of the system about which all things 
revolve, toward which all things tend, and which directs and controls 
every part of the organism ? Can a society, founded without this idea) 
have any lasting, cohesive power in it ? Must not such a society soon 
resolve itself into its individual elements, and the scattered fragments fly 
asunder in ail directions ? 

WHAT THE MINORITY SAY ON THIS POINT. 

Now, then, we come to a practical proposition, on which we do not 
agree at all ; and if we can reasonably show tht^t our religious instruc- 
tion, given at home and in the Sunday School, is seriously interfered 
with by the present system, and to an extent which, in conscience, we 
cannot sanction, then your proposition is refuted, and our plea for sep- 
arate schools where this most important of all instruction can be given 
and the eftects of it maintained stands good ; for remember what I said 
to you in the beginning about necessary consequences. You have ad- 
mitted the paramount necessity of religious instruction. This means by 
necessary consequence that nothing whatever shall be allowed to ^tand 
in the way of religious instruction ; that whatever seriously conflicts 
with it must yield. This is your own admission. All that is necessary 
now for us to make our case is, to show that the system, as at present 
managed, does seriously interfere with the religious instruction we desire 
to give our children. Now, if you would receive as proof on this point 
the admissions of some of your own leading Pretestant ministers, I would 
have no difficulty whatever in making (Jitr case. They frankly admit 
that any Catholic child who attends the public school is almost certain 
to lose his faith, that millions of children of Catholics in this country 
have been drawn from the faith of their fathers by this means already ; 
and then they rub their hands and joyfully exclaim : " The good work 
goes bravely on !" They say to their zealous adherents : " Keep up the 
system as it is, and by means of it we can destroy the faith of millions 
and millions of Catholic children in this country. Keep up the cry for 
our public schools ; force Catholics to send their children there, and by 
means of the machinery at our command, our text books, our teachers, 
and our children, we will grind the Catholicity out of them." Do you 
call for proofs ? I 'think it probable that there is not one of you who has 
not heard the declaration made by Protestant ministers and teachers in 
more or less express terms, or who does not at heart really beUeve it. I 
have often heard it made. Bishop McQuaid, in the lecture I herein refer 
to, says : " A famous Presbyterian minister openly avowed that the Bible 
and the common schools were the two stones of the mill that would grind 
Catholicity out of the children of Catholics." A Methodist minister 
boasted that Catholics had lost in twelve years 1,999,000. lu corrobora- 
tion of. the statement. Rev. Dr. Clark, of Albany, an outspoken bigot, 



16 

who tells more truths than his friends care to have him tell, says " that 
multitudes have yielded to the influence of our institutions, and that the 
most eftectual agency in this work has been our admirable public school 
system." (See lecture.) 

Is this, after all, the explanation of the singular conduct of the ma- 
jority whenever we complain of the working of the system? Is this the 
reason why they wish to smother all discussion as to the operation of the 
law? Does this account for the singular frenzy, whether simulated or 
real, which they exhibit whenever we ask for an inquii-y into the subject? 
"We do not admit to you that it is the reason of our opposition to tlie 
system as now managed; we do not put it in the form of an admission; we 
do not insinuate it ; we if/iar^e it in the plainest, boldest, strongest lan- 
guage we can command. We oppose the present management of the 
system, for the very reason that your Protestant ministers give in support 
of it ; that it does grind the Catholicity out of Catholic children ; that it 
does directly nullify our religious teaching ; and, therefore, that it does, 
in some in£tances, indirectly teach your religion, and in all other cases 
directly teaches irreligion. There are eiglit million Catholics in this 
country, who show in this that they have one of the greatest grievances 
of which any people were ever able to complain ; for what is more sacred 
than the faitli of one's fathers' Now, you may reluse to receive the 
authority of your own ministers and teachers in this matter. If so, we 
must open the discussion here, de novo, though of course we shall not 
allow you to set aside altogether the declarations of your own represen- 
tative men. 

You say our proposition is .wrong because it seeks to make the State 
interfere with religion, by having it taught in schools supported by the 
State. Now, we are arguing here at cross purposes. One or the other 
of us is either mistaken or insincere. You say the State should not 
meddle with religion. So do we, and yet we do not agree. The truth 
is, we agree on the major but differ on the minor. Your syllogism is, the 
State should not meddle with religious teaching ; the public schools do 
not meddle with it ; therefore, so far they are right. We say, the State 
should not meddle with religion ; the public schools do meddle with it ; 
therefore, so far they are wrong. We must discuss the minor. 

Now, look at your proposition, that attendance in the public schools- 
as they are now managed, will not seriously conflict. with the religious 
training given in the Sunday School, in the case of our poor children. 
You must remember that this question mainly concerns the poor. The 
rich of all classes who value religion send their children to private schools. 
The mass of poor children get no religious training at home of much 
practical value. You say, then, that the child can be sent for an hour or 
two on Sunday to the Church, and that that will be sufficient training 
in its religious belief; that that will be sufficient to give it a good, 
healthy, practical and abiding religious faith. Is this proposition reason- 



able on its face? Does it not carry its own refutation with it ? We all 
laiow bow powerful are the effects of association on adult minds, fully 
formed and fully convinced of certain truths; but with the tender, un- 
formed, imitative but not reasoning mind of a child, association and ex- 
amjile are the most powerful and effective of all teachers. A child cannot 
understand general principles, but it c^n imitate an example perfectly. 
You may give it elaborate lectures once a week on the truths of religion ; 
but, if you place it the remaining six days of the week in an institution 
wdiere religion is ignored, you not only loose the opportunity of making 
a practical application of those principles in the way you understand 
them, which it is admitted you have the right to do, but you subject it 
to all manner of counter influences. You value the retention of these 
principles by your child dearer than you do your life. You know that 
it is only by infinite labor, unceasing diligence, and careful example, 
that you can hope to get these ijrinciples firmly imjilanted ; and yet, at 
the very time you are trying to do this, and at the only time in life when 
it can be done, you are asked to expose your child to an association 
where he will find those principles met by flouts, scoffs, sneers, laughter, 
ridicule and contempt — influences most potent with the youthful mind. 
Is it possible you can candidly claim that such associations will not 
seriously interfere with the child's belief as to these principles ? Why, even 
mathematically speaking, is it not at least six to one that it will ? Can 
any child be expected to assert and act upon its principles under such 
circumstances ? Does it not require an unusual amount of moral cour- 
age for the adult man to announce his principles or convictions in a 
community where such principles are not to say merely unpopular, but 
are hated and despised ? Why, I have drawn down a storm of indigna- 
tion on my head in this community, aw-ay out here on the frontier, wdiere 
people are said to be so large minded, so free from bias, so tolerant of all 
opposing views, for simply daring to utter my honest convictions on 
this very matter. I know of exhibitions of feeling in this community, 
consequent on this declaration of my opinions, which if pointed out to 
me by a critical foreigner disposed to question the liberty of speech 
among us, would cause me to blush for my countrymen. Do you think 
it reasonable to ask me to send a little child of mine, upon whose tender 
mind I am trying to impress my opinions, as I have a right to do, six 
days out of seven into a community composed in the main of children of 
these same people who think my opinions so bigoted, heretical and 
damnable ? Is it reasonable to say to me that my child will not be 
seriously influenced in its opinions by any association it may meet with 
there ? Are you mocking me when you talk thus, for surely you cannot 
seriously maintain such a proposition ? You may say to me that my 
child must expect to meet with a conflict of opinion as to these principles. 
Yes ; when I have completed its education, and when I send it out to act 
its part in the battle of life, I am willing it should ; but I -vvant it to have 
a chance to form some definite opinions first, and understand the reasons 



18 

for them, not to ijrow up another Frankenstein — a creature formed like 
a man in all respects, except that the moral faculties are left out; an 
intelleJjtual monster turned loose upon society with no other motive in 
life than to gratify its desires and keep out of the Penitentiary ! 

I grant that, in your case, your proposition is true. It is true that 
your children do not find the influence of the public school, so far as it 
is manifested by actual expression of opinion, to be seriously in conflict 
with their home or Sunday teaching, and you are right enough in up- 
holding the public schools for your children, if you are satisfied with them, 
but the very fact that your proposition is true, so tar as your children are 
concerned, is or ought to be sufficient, without any further talk, to prove 
that it is not true as far as our children are concerned. Here are two 
classes of children receiving at home and on Sundays diametrically 
opposite instruction on religious questions. For six days in the week 
they are exposed to a common influence — negative or positive, I don't 
care which — in religious matters. Now, is it necessary to have any fur- 
ther talk to prove— to demonstrate, one might almost say — that just so 
far as that influence is satisfactory to the parents of one class it must to 
the same or a greater extent be unsatisfactory to the parents of the other 
class ? Being a matter of conscience, it is not capable of compromise, 
nor a subject which can be generally averaged by balancing against it 
some worldly advantages obtained by the association complained of It 
puts a dead lock on the machinery of the system so far as we are con- 
cerned. The machinery can be readjusted so as to enable us to use it, 
and with no injury to the machine. But you say. Hands oft'! Why so ? 
Are we not part owners of the concern ? And if you want to run it for 
your own exclusive benefit, why don't you oft'er to buy us out first ? But 
no ; you insist that you shall have all the benefits, but that we shall 
help bear the expense the same as if we were l)eing fairly dealt with. 
Is not that rather a high-handed proceeding ? Is there much justice 
or equity in that kind of conduct ? Sup])ose the tables were turned, do 
you think you would be of the same opinion still ? Suppose we had a 
school here composed in the main of children who think as I do, teacljers 
all of my opinion, studying from text books written by men of my opin- 
ion, and colored as far as possible to favor my opinion, without directly 
stating it, would you be willing to send your little children to such a 
school, six days out of seven, simply because we might be able to say, 
" We do not hi arpress words teach our doctrine there." And suppose 
some of you say you would, what would that prove ? Would it prove 
anything more than this, that you do not care as much about your opin- 
ions on religious subjects as we do, or that you do not think the ett'ect 
of those silent influences on the mind of your child would be any serious 
objection ? Is not that all it would prove ? Some of you may not have 
any religious convictions. Some of you may be indift'erent to all relig- 
ious opinions. Some of you may take the ground I have often heard 
Americans take, that it is wrong to teach a child any religious doctrine ; 



19 

that j'ou should not prejudice its mind ; that you should let it choose for 
itself when it grows up, free from any previous bias. Such people may- 
be willing to send their children anywhere ; but because they are of that 
oijinion, does that give them any right to say that nobody else ought to 
have a ditt'erent opinion ? This question cuts deep ; it goes to the very prin- 
ciple of civil and religious liberty. Wherever we have had a majority — 
and there has been any consideralile number who claimed they could 
not, in conscience, attend our schools — we have set you an example of 
liberality ; we have accorded to such minority the same privileges we 
now ask of you. In Lower Canada we were nine to one against you, 
nearly twice as great a majority as you have over us here, yet we gave 
you there the very liberty we now demand. We have done it in every 
country in Europe where we had the power, and the substantial griev- 
ance existed. You do not believe this ; but, as I told you before, you 
are not well read up on the subject. You have been reading one side 
only. When you come to examine the whole case, you will be astonish- 
ed — nay, you will be amazed— to see how your intelligences have been 
IJlayed upon by partizan writers. Some of , you niay think you are very 
liberal in consenting to tolerate our religious faith in this country, and 
that we ought to be modest in our pretensions. Permit me to remind 
you that you do not tolerate us here. No ; no more than we tolerate you. 
None of us are here by toleration ; we are all here by right. Will you 
accept the declaration of the Supreme Court of the State of Ohio as 
some authority on this proposition ? Here is what the Court says : " It 
is not by mere toleration that every individual here is protected in his 
belief or disbelief. He reposes not upon the leniency of government, or 
the. liberality of any class or sect of men, but upon his natural, indefeas- 
ible rights of conscience, which, in the language of the Constitution, are 
beyond the control of any human authority."' (Bloom vs. Richards, 2 
' Ohio St., 387 ; McGatrick vs. Wason, 4 Ohio St., 566.) You may think 
we attach too much importance to this question ot religious instruction ; 
but that is our affair, not yours. 

SUMMARY OF WHAT THE MINORITY CLAIM. 

I have attempted to state to you our argument. I know, in the 
hurried preparation I have made, I have not done it justice ; but the 
main points are these : 

1st. Eeligious instruction is of paramount importance. 

2d. Each parent has the right to say what religious instruction his 
child shall receive. 

3d. We cannot, in conscience, send our children to the public 
schools as they are now managed, because they nullify our religious in- 
struction. 

4th. The public schools are public property, supported by public 
funds, in the management of which the whole public has an equal right 
to be heard, and to have the interests of the whole public considered. 



20 

5th. We have a right to demand that such change shall be made 
as will enable us, in conscience, to avail ourselves of the system of main- 
taining schools by enforced taxation, so long as we are contributing to 
the support of that system. 

6th. "We have a right to present amendments which will be satis- 
factory to us, and urge their adoption. 

7th. On such presentation, it is the duty of the majority, if the 
existence of the grievance is proved, either to adopt the amendments 
offered by us, or some others which will subserve the general welfare. 

8th. If the majority refuse to do either of these things, it is their 
duty either to give us the portion of the fund we have ourselves paid in, 
and let us manage it ourselves, or else relieve us from the obligation of 
making such payment. 

SOME OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 

I have stated our propositions. I have supported them by such 
argument as at present occurs to my mind. I shall present other argu- 
ments when I come to answer objections. Now, let us see what some of 
these objections are. At the very outset I am met with this argument 
by many pei-sons : " What is the use of raising this question ? It is 
merely making a fight for nothing. The majority are dead set on this 
matter, and you can never move them. Why will you disturb things 
and evoke a discussion which can be only time lost after all ? " I must 
claim that that is a very poor argument. Some one has said that one 
great difference between a man and a mule is, that a man can change 
his mind, but that a mule can't. Now, I believe we have a good. many 
men in this community who can reason. I feel so confident of it that I 
am willing to undertake an argument with them. I have seen major- 
ities change ere now. Some years ago an old and valued friend of mine 
introduced a certain bill in the California Legislature ; and you may 
judge how little prospect of success he had when I tell you that, before 
he could ask its reference to the proper committee, one of the majority 
broke in on him, and moved to lay it on the table. Another moved an 
amendment, that the bill be pitched out of the window, which latter 
motion prevailed. It was, as I am informed, then resolved that the bill 
was too filthy a thing for any officer of the House to touch, and that the 
Sergeant-at-Arms should get a fire tongs, and by means of them execute 
the will of the House. Well, there was a cheerful fight for a man to 
enter on, surely ! Now, do you know that I sat in that very Legislature 
only a few years after, and saw that same identical bill passed almost by 
acclamation ? That was the bill to allow negroes to testify in courts of 
justice. So you see fights may be won, even though they don't look very 
promising at the start. When one has right on his side, he must win 
among a free people sooner or later, if he is only true to his cause. We 
feel that we are rjght in this matter ; that we are entitled to our belief, 
and that it is a matter of conscience for us to declare that belief — nay, to 



21 

Ijroclaim it everywhere, to blazon the truth upon our banners, and then 
what ? Fold them carefully, and hide them away, lest some offense be 
taken ? No ! Our duty is to fling them to the breeze, sound the note 
of battle, throw ourselves body and soul into the fight, do our "level 
best" to win ; then, if the Fates be against us, if the glory of victory is 
to be reserved for other warriors later in the fight, why, so be it ; but 
we sh^U have done our duty. No man can do more, and no man can 
claim to be a man if he is content to do less. 

HOAV THE SYSTEM IS WORKING. 

The next great argument I hear is this : The system is working very 
well as it is. It is one of the most glorious institutions of our country. 
It provides for the education of the poor of all classes, giving them an 
opportunity to get that knowledge which will enable them to rise from 
their poverty and become worthy citizens of this great Eepublic ; that, 
in a country with universal suffrage, the education of the masses is neces- 
sary to prevent the Republic from going to destruction, and that this is 
the only means by which it can be done. 

Well, in the first place, there are two questions which must be 
answered in the affirmative before it can be said that the system works 
well as it is. 

1st. Supposing that the children of the masses do attend the 
schools, is the instruction given there such as would naturally tend to 
make good citizens ? 

2d. Do the children of the masses attend the schools as established ? 
or, if they do not attend, is it because they have no insuperable objection 
to attending ? 

We contend that the first question cannot be answered in the 
affirmative, and refer to Herbert Spencer as one authority in support of 
such contention, and would refer to more and argue the question fully, 
were it not that, after warning you of your error — if you are willing to 
patronize such schools — we have no objection, personally, to your doing 
so. We deplore the results that will, in time, inevitably flow from the 
system, and shall px-obably, from time to time, warn you of the con- 
sequences, and implore you to save the youth of this country, and the 
country itself, from the evils of godless education ; but, if we cannot 
persuade you to try to save your children, we ask to be permitted to try' 
to save our own. 

We contend that the second question cannot be answered in the 
affirmative. We allege that the children of the masses do not attend 
the schools, and that an immense number refuse to attend because they 
cannot, in conscience, do so. 

In denial of the allegation that the system works well as it is, I shall 
present some statistics taken from an able lecture on this subject by the 
learned Bishop McQuaid, of Rochester, New York, delivered in Cleve- 
land, Ohio, the 17th of December last. He says : "In the city of 



Eocliester the system is tottering under a load of High School, with 
Latin, Greek, French, German, music, drawing and contingent expenses. 
To cut down exi)enses, they have resolved to buy no more feather 
dusters and - charcoal. Yet, in Rochester, taking their own figures for 
one of the most favorable months in the year, they have only a few over 
7,000 children in their schools ; the Catholics have about 5,000 children ; 
the Lutheran, Episcopalian and private schools have about 1,600— in 
other words, only about one half the children attending schools iu the 
city are in the public schools." (See Lecture referred to.) 

Evidently the system is not working very well in Rochester ! It 
will not do to say the schools are open, and that the rest could attend if 
they wished. There are 5,000 of them in one body who cannot attend 
on account of conscientious objections — religious objections, which every 
one is bound to respect He says further : "The system is breaking 
down in Clevelaml, Ohio, because there are there over 7,000 children 
in Christian free schools, and not in the public schools; because, in 
Cincinnati, nearly one-half the children in the city going to school are to 
be found in Christian free schools ; because, in New York City, there 
are about 30,000, and a like number in Brooklyn, whose parents prefer 
Christian to public schools. There are manufacturing villages in the 
New England States, as Chicopee, Putnam, Baltic, and others, in which 
the proportion is still greater. I have heard of one place having 400 
children in its Christian schools, and only thirty in the common schools." 
(See the Lecture referred to.) 

If you will examine the Catholic Directory for 1875, you will find 
reports from over sixty Bishoprics and Archbishoprics in the United 
States, showing that there were nearly half a million children in attend- 
ance at Catholic schools in this country in the year 1874, and that over 
one-third of a million were being educated in Catholic free schools, all of 
whom are by right entitled to their share of the public school fund, but 
who are deprived of it now by the unjust and arbitrary legislation of the 
present majority. To give some instances in round numbers, you will 
find 1,000 in Wheeling, 2,000 in Springfield, 3,000 in Louisville, 4,000 in 
Erie, 5,000 in Hartford. 6,000 in Galveston, 7,000 in Boston, 8,000 in 
Albany, 9,000 in Milwaukee, 10,000 in Alton, 11,000 in St. Louis, 12,000 
in Buftalo, 15,000 in Detroit, 17,000 in Pittsburgh, 18,000 in Brooklyn, 
20,000 in Philadelphia, 21,000 in Newark, 22,000 in Chicago, 23,000 in 
Cincinnati, and 42,000 in New York. These numbers are for the diocese 
in each case, not merely for the city named. 

These are startling figures in reply to your claim, that the system is 
giving general satisfaction as it is, and we have only just begun to 
operate outside of the system, having been unable to ol:)tain justice 
within it. Large as these figures are, you Avill find them doubled, 
trebled and quadrupled in the coming years, as fast as we are able to 
erect new buildings to supply our wants. 



23 ♦ 

AVill you amend the law uow while these hundreds of thousands 
of bright, sharp young Americans are willing to accept amendments, or 
will you wait ? Do you think if you wait till these legions of trained 
minds come upon the scene as voters and workers in this fight, keenly 
alive to the injustice which throughout all their years of childhood has 
been perpetrated upon them, that you will get better terms than are 
offered now? And if you think you might be willing to agree to a just 
arrangement then, how much better to do it now ? 

It is true the system is breaking down ; but it is not we who are 
destroying it. We are giving it double the aid of any other class of 
people. We pay our money regularly in support of it, and do not bur- 
den it with the care of our children. We do not think the system of free 
education will ever break down in this country ; it certainly never will, 
so far as our people are concerned. The thing that will break down one 
of these days will be your unwise, illiberal and arbitrary management of 
it. It will not be long before the wiser heads among you will realize 
that the present Procrustean policy is unjust in principle and pernicious 
in results ; then a proper change will be made, and the system, endowed 
with new life and receiving the hearty support of all classes of our 
people, will begin in earnest the great work of truly educating the child- 
ren of this country ; then it will be a system that all can defend and 
support, but not till then. 

Wherever you look you will find there is a very large proportion of 
the children who do not and cannot avail themselves of the system as 
now managed. And how is it, right here in your own town ? I am a 
new-comer here, and of course, cannot speak of my own knowledge ; but 
I have asked a friend to get the figures for me, and to be particular and 
get them correct. They have been given to me by him as follows, which 
any of you can verify : Public school, boys, 96 ; girls, 29. Sisters' school, 
89. Parochial school, 69. Mr. Springs' school, 12. One private school, 
8, another 9, or 312 in all. Out of this 312, how many are in the public 
schools? Only 125— a great deal less than one-half ! Evidently the 
system is not working very well here either, where, notwithstanding 
that all are taxed, more than half refuse to attend ; yet these 12 j children 
get all the money, and the 187 get nothing. By the school census it 
appears there are over 900 children in this county. Your system is con- 
ducted in such a way that, with all your efforts, you can get only 135 
into your schools, and yet in your apportionment you are allowed money 
for over 900 children, and you educate only 125. Now, is this fair ? 
Why should the money not be divided equally ? The fund is gathered 
from the whole people ; why should not the whole people have the ben- 
efit of it \ Is there any difficulty in making the division ? I tell you, if 
you were the ones that were hurt by it, you would soon find a way to 
divide it. Now, as a practical people, in a free country, legislating 
for the general good, claiming to allow full religious freedom, what are 
you going to do under the circumstances ? Can you say in the face of 



24 



these facts, that the system is working well as it is ? Can j'ou say that a 
system, works well which taxes one-half of the people ior the ex- 
clusive benefit, practically, of the other half, and particularly when this 
is not a taxation of the rich for the benefit of the poor, but notoriously a 
taxation of the poor for the benefit of the rich ? for it is undeniable that 
the great majority of the children who are now excluded from the 
schools on account of religious convictions are the children of poor 
people, children of the laboring class who can very ill afford to pay a 
tax at all, but to whom it becomes an absolute oppression to pay first a 
tax for gorgeous public school buildings, wherein the children of the 
rich may get their Latin, Greek, French, German and Music, gratis — 
things which it is a mockery to the poor to say they may also have it if 
they wish — and then, after that, draw upon their scanty savings for 
money to build their own school houses, and provide their own teachers 
for their children, and then pay you, after all, an additional tax on these 
same school buildings they have been obliged to erect for themselves ? 
Can you look us in the face and say that such a system works very well 
as it is ? Oh, yes ; it works very well, so far as you are concerned. • You 
get our money and do not have to expend it upon our children. It enables 
you to build palaces of learning, to engage the most skilled professors, to 
establish Normal schools, to carefully train your teachers; and no 
wonder you like it. Then you are so very generous withal as to boast 
to us of the superiority of your schools, built, in great part, with our 
money, and point contemptuously to the modest little showing we have 
been able to make with the little you have left us. 

Did you ever hear the fable of the Boys and the Frogs i It was very 
good fun for the boys, but death to the frogs. We don't wonder that 
you are satisfied with the system. It's "nuts" for you, we know, and the 
longer we stay out the better you like it, provided always we pay. But 
do you think such a system can last very long in this country ? I tell 
you that if you want to save the system, you had better begin and doctor 
it a little, before it is too late. It can't last always the way things are 
going on now, and it is the part of wise men to conciliate in time. Tou 
are, by your own acts, forcing the people, whom you charge as being 
opposed to the system, into the very position which will render them 
independent of it. Tou are compelling them to build their own schools 
Jjy thousands, and to accustom themselves to voluntarily support them. 
Is not that actually driving them into a position of independence? 
When they get their school houses all built and their machinery fully 
organized, what need will they have of your system ? and how could 
you expect them to favor it when it had operated on them in that man- 
ner ? This question is really worthy of your consideration. Our de- 
mands ought to receive respectful attention, and not be so contemp- 
tuously cast aside. 



25 

FIOHTING FOR A PRINCIFLK. 

We are not asking for mucb. We ask only to hare the use of our 
own money. I imagine that when you come to count it out to us, and 
see how small a sum it is — for we are, as a class, very poor people, and 
do not pay a very large tax compared with the revenues of a State, 
though it is large to us — you will be astonished that we made such a 
fuss over so little. You may probably be inclined to feel as the high- 
waymen did toward the Scotchman. Did you ever hear the story ? A 
Scotchman was assailed by three highwaymen who claimed his money 
or Iiis lile. He made a most desperate resistance,, seriously injuring his 
opponents, and only after a iiard flght was he overpowered. When they 
came to "investigate" him, they found nothing on hira but a battered 
old sixpence. 

"Why, the deuce take the fellow ! " said one ; "when he made such 
a fight for that, I suppose if he had had eighteen pence, he would have 
killed the whole of us." 

You see, they did not understand the motive of his resistance. 
Like us, he was fighting on principle. He did not want to l)e robbed. 

Hampden retused to pay a few shillings of tax in the way of ship 
money. It did not amount to much, but it brought to the block the 
head of one of the proudest and most royal kings that ever sat upon a 
throne. It convulsed a nation, changed the civilization of a people, and 
struck terror to the hearts of kings and emperors throughout the civil- 
ized world. Oh, I tell you, the rights of a people are a dangerous thing 
to trifle with. True, we have now, thank God, an easier way to settle 
such disputes. The silent, softly-falling ballot does the work with us 
quietly, effectually, swiftly and securely. Do you think that remedy 
will not be resorted to if all other arguments fail ? Do you wish to force 
such a flght ? and are you willing to placidly declare that you will yield 
to nothing but force in this matter ? That there shall be no discussion ? 
Do you sustain the previous question on us ? If so, it is you who force 
us to vote on the main question. 

ARE WE TRYING TO BREAK DOWN THE SYSTEM ? 

The great, final, and, as you allege, overwhelming objection is this : 
that if we grant this privilege to one set of people, all the others will 
claim it, and our public schools will be broken up. Now, it seems to me 
a very singular objection to make to a law intended to render justice to 
all parties, that, if it passed, nearly everybody will accept the benefits of 
it. Why, I should think that would be one of the strongest arguments 
that could be urged in its favor. But how can you reconcile that pro- 
position with the other one you assert with equal vehemence, that every- 
body but us is satisfied with the system as it is ! You must be wrong in 
one or the other of these propositions. It is clearly impossible that 
everybody but us can be satisfied with the present system, and think it 
the best that can be devised ; and yet that if you should permit a change, 



everybody would eagerly avail himself of it. Now, which of these 
arguments will you stand on ? I cannot contend against both in the one 
breath. It seems to me that either you must give up your proposition 
that everybody but us is satisfied, and admit that there is a general, 
wide-spread dissatisfaction on this subject of religious education, and that 
therefore the system needs overhauling and readjustment, and that our 
claims are just, or else you must give up your other proposition that to 
allow us to withdraw would break up the system. + * * i cannot 
pretend to argue with you on these two conflicting i^ropositions until 
you declare which one of them you maintain to be true. But perhaps I 
may be permitted to throw in this remark : what is the vital principle 
in this law, which makes it a system ? What is there systematic about 
a public school which distinguishes it from any other school ? Two 
things I imagine you will claim, and two things only : First — that in 
the public school, tuition is free ; but that is not a sufficient distinction, 
for our Parochial schools are also free. Second — and this we admit and 
claim is the only vital element distinguishing the system — that the fund 
to maintain these schools is raised by uniform taxation enforced by law. 
Now, how would permitting particular schools to be established and 
receive their share of the fund interfere with the distinguishing princi- 
ple of raising the fund by taxation ? Why, it is done every day now ! 
New schools are constantly being established and their share of the fund 
allotted to them without experiencing any difficulty whatever. It is a 
mere question of detail for clerks and accountants to settle. The 
apportionments we ask for could be much more easily ascertained than 
the ones you now make. At present when a new school district is formed 
you have to send a Marshal all over the district and take a census of the 
children ; you have to calculate the total number of childien, and the 
proportion that number bears to the whole number in the county, Mnd 
then divide the fund in the same proportion. The amendment we ask 
settles the whole matter, so far as we are concerned, at the time the 
money is paid, while the machinery as to public schools goes on as 
before. A certain corporation is granted the right to establish schools ; 
as the taxes are paid in, the parties designate to which corporation they 
want their tax to go, and if they do not make such designaticm it goes 
to the common fund. The amount is credited to such corporation at 
once, or to the common fund. Every three months the Treasurer pays 
over the amount to which such corporation is entitled. It is a far 
simpler process than the one which is now used for public-schools. So 
there is no difficulty on that score. 

But you may say that a person might order his tax to be paid to a 
corporate school and then send his children to a public school, to which 
he has not contributed. Is there any difficulty about that? Would a 
parent who prefers to send his children to the public schools order his 
tax to be paid to a corporate school ? But there may be cases, you will 
say, where he would. Well, the cases would certainly be rare ; and have 



27 

you not machinery for the very same difficulty now ? You do not allow 
a parent who lives in one district to send his children to the school of an 
adjoining distiict because he has not contributed to that school, and you 
have no difficulty in discovering and presenting any evasion of the law 
in this respect. I tell you, all that is necessary to do this thing is to 
have the will to do it. These matters of detail can be easily arranged. 

Then you fall back on your duplicate and conflicting proposition 
that to allow us to withdraw would break up the schools; that every- 
body would withdraw and there would be no funds left for the public 
schools. Well, if all the children are withdrawn into these corporate 
schools, it is because the people unanimously prefer them. There would 
then be no children unprovided for ; and what would you do with a 
balance of funds if you had it, if you had no children lelt to educate ? 
Then I am sure you will double back and assert that when you say 
everybody would withdraw, you mean that a great many would remain. 
I have to follow you all around to get at your argument. Now, as to 
these children who remain. They are not orphans. Absolute orphans* 
with no one to look out for them at» all, are provided for in asylums. 
These children who remain in the public schools after everybody has 
withdrawn, as you say, have some representatives, and, if their parents 
prefer the public schools, their taxes follow the children ; they get their 
due and proper share first, like anybody else. Do you want them to 
have more than their share? They will get more than their share by 
the amendments we propose, because all taxes not especially directed 
to be paid to corporate schools lapse to the public schools, and the per- 
centage of tax which will thus lapse through the carelessness or indif- 
ference of the tax-payer will be very large. Do you ask where shall the 
children go whose parents pay no tax ? Let them do as they do now : 
go to whatever school they prefer. Do you ask if this would not allow 
the different corporations to get rid of their poor children, and throw 
them into the public schools by making their oj;vn schools unpleasant 
for them? Don't be alarmed. The different corporations, instead of 
driving such children out, will be hunting them up, and drawing them 
into their schools, and making things there as pleasant for them as pos- 
sible, in order to give them religious instruction. The people who like 
public schools as at present conducted will simply be put on the same 
footing, with the same rights and privileges as those who don't like 
them. Do you want more than this ? Do you want an unfair advan- 
tage ? Now, I must follow you back to your other proposition, which is 
in direct conflict with the one I have just been alluding to— I say allud- 
ing to it; I cannot argue until you decide which one you will choose. 
At present you have two propositions to my one ; and when I put my 
finger on you, on one of them, like the Irishman's flea, you are not there, 
but sitting up gay and lively on the other one, ready to hop back the 
moment I make that other position unpleasant for you. You say, then, 



28 

in the other proposition, that everybody is satisfied but us, and yet, else- 
where, that, to let us withdraw, will break up the system. 

EFFECT OF OUR WITHDRAWAL. 

You say that to let us withdraw will break up the system. Why, we 
have withdrawn our children already. All you have from us now is our 
money, which you force from us against our will. Do you mean to say 
that you cannot educate your children without our money, when we show 
you that we value education so highly that we submit to the robbery of 
that money, and yet, out of our own pockets, educate our own children 
besides, and pay taxes on the houses we do it in, too, while you have ex- 
empted your own buildings from all taxation ? I should think you would 
be ashamed to make that admission. And do you not fear your children 
will blush to think that, though possessed of ample means, you were not 
willing to pay your share of the cost of their tuition, but compelled them 
to accept a large portion of it, in the form of an unwilling contribution, 
from, to a great extent, the children of their servants ? that by an arbi- 
trary exercise of power, you too4c from your servants' scanty wages the 
money they needed for the education of their children, and compelled 
them to lavish it upon yours, and build up fancy schools for them where 
Latin, Greek, French, German, music, and all such high-flown instruc- 
tion, can be had by your children free, while ours must be content with 
such rudiments of knowledge as we can afford to pay for out of our own 
pockets? And even this is not the limit of your oppression. With all 
this injustice weighing down upon us, to make us revolt against your 
management of the system, you devise new means to draw money from 
us. You get up balls, parties, fairs, lotteries, and such devices, to fur- 
nish additional funds to enable you to outshine us in the matter of splen- 
did school-buildings and general outfit, to which we have no possible 
objection whatever. We do the same things for our own schools. What 
we do protest against, however, is this : You call upon us to join with you, 
and aid you in the battle against us ; and when one of us has the inde- 
pendence to say. No, not while you continue to perpetrate upon us this 
glaring injustice, you rise en iiKime against us ; you apply to us the most 
offensive epithets known to your extensive vocabulary, and would seem 
to be willing, not only to put us under a social ban, but actually sweep 
us out of existence. Now, this would seem to us exceedingly comical, 
were it not so decidedly unpleasant. Is there not something ludicrous 
as well as painful to see a person apply the lash to another with one 
hand, while at the same time extending the other hand for alms, and 
abusing his victim roundly if he does not give it i^ No ; be a little just 
to us before you abuse us for not being generous to you. Give us a fair 
' share in the benefits of the system of supporting schools by enforced 
taxation, and you will find us working hand in hand with you, shoulder 
^0 shoulder, in all honest efforts to educate the children of our country. 
You will find that, when you have gone to your farthest limits in self- 



•sacrifice in contributing to the cause of education, we will be far in ad- 
vance of you, beckoning you on. We are paying now three taxes to 
your one for education ; so you see we are not opposed to schools by any 
means. We believe in education ; we prove it by our acts. W.e honor 
you for your devotion to the cause. We delight to see the interest you 
take in it. We hope you may always be devoted to popular instruction — 
the education of the masses. True education is almost divine in its 
nature, in this, that it draws us towards divinity. It is one of the most 
glorious things for which a sacrifice can be made. Americans are nobly 
right in worshipping it ; but with them there is " a little rift within the 
lute," and they must mend that rift to be able to produce harmonious re- 
sults. Till this be done all is discord. They must abandon the Pagan idea 
that intellectual culture is sufficient. They must recognize God. They 
must give religious instruction as well as intellectual ; and they must allow 
each parent to control the religious instruction of his child. Then the 
system will be humanly perfect ; but, until then, all is wrong. Do not be 
alarmed at a subdivision of the schools : it may cost a little more pei- 
capita ; but do not let us sacrifice all to the almighty dollar. With sub- 
divided schools we may not have such grand educational edifices ; but 

' palatial structures are not necessary for the success of education. Some 
of our greatest mei* came from the log school-houses of the past, and 
even with subdivision, we can furnish all necessary accommodation. The 
pri^iciple is the main thing ; bricks and mortar, logs and mud, are trifles 
in comparison. We say we are not satisfied as things now go ; and even 
the Nevsr York Times, one of the most radical papers on your side, in an 
article regarding the teaching of the German lano:uage in the public 
schools of Ohio, says : " So long as the public schools exist, they cer- 
tainly ought to be founded on a plan which is satisfactory to all classes 
attending them." Just what we claim ! 

THE MAJOniTY KNOW THET AKK UNJUST. 

Now, I know that your consciences are not easy on this matter, and 
the reason I think so is, that I can neyer get any of you to discuss the 
question on its merits— at least, I have never yet been able to do so. When 
we find a man charged with committing a wrong, who professes to be 
willing and anxious to vindicate himself but will not discuss the issue, 
and insists upon inquiring whether your wife's aunt's husband's grand- 
father's uncle did not, on a certain occasion, do certain things, then we 
infer that he is either trifling with us, or that he knows he is guilty, and 
seeks to evade the issue. We have charged that you are guilty of perpe- 
trating on us an enormous fraud ; we make our proofs that we have been 
robbed, are being robbed, and, unless you grant us some relief, must con- 
tinue for some indefinite time to submit to this robbery. We charge 
that you are unfairly getting the benefit of this robbery ; that you are a 
party to the fraud, and profiting by it, and we ask relief. Now, you 
may think there is no truth in the charge, and feel that you are not 



called upon to deny it ; but, if you do undertake to deny it, let us argue* 
the question at issue. Life is too short to argue everything ; and let us 
settle one thing at a time — that is, if you are going to take issue with us, 
let us settle the issue first, and then, if we feel disposed, we can talk of 
other things afterwards. We desire to meet you fairly in this matter, 
and discuss the issue with you in the best possible humor. It is a matter 
of public policy, in which we all feel a great intetest. If we can meet, 
discuss and agree on some plan which will be satisfactory to all, well and 
good. We ought to try rational discussion first ; if that fails to bring us 
to an agreement, then each j^arty must pursue his remaining remedies. 
The Hindoos say : " The snail sees only the walls of his shell, and thinks 
it the grandest palace in the universe." Let us come out of our shell, 
look around a little, and see if we can't get some new ideas about things, 
and not imitate the action of the cuttle-fish, which, when pursued (so 
naturalists tell us), settles down in the mud, and ejects a black secretion 
which so darkens the waters all around it that its real position cannot 
be ascertained. 

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND EDUCATION. 

Then you have another objection. You Si^jr you cannot yield 
to the demand for separate schools, be cause tlie Catholic Church would 
immediately withdraw its children and its money from the public schpols, 
and that the Catholic children would not be educated at all, because the 
Catholic Church, you choose to say^ is opposed to the education of 
the masses, and that it would teach them nothing but the Catechism, the 
Lives of the Saints and other things, which, you again choose to say, 
are ail nonsense. 

First, your main proposition on this head is untrue; second, it is 
absurd. It ia untrue that the Catholic Church is opposed to the education 
of the masses. As the history of the Catholic Church is the history of the 
whole world for the last nineteen hundred years, it is rather too large a 
subject to enter upon in detail in the limits of a lecture ; so we deny gen- 
erally, and, as the lawyers say, move to strike out your allegations on this 
head as scandalous and impertinent, and on this motion we will take issue 
with you upon any fitting occasion. . We also invite your attention to 
what would generally be considered a fair test. If there ever was a 
place where the Catholic Church had the power to act, it was in Rome, 
while the Pope was not only the visible head of the Church, but also 
the actual head of the State. If the Church were -opposed to the educa- 
tion of the masses, there would, of course, have been no free schools for 
them in Rome. Well, we aver it as a fact, that, during the temporal 
reign of the present Pope, the city of Rome possessed a better system of 
free schools for the education of the masses, than this country has ever 
shown ; better taught free schools, and with a greater percentage of the 
population attending them, than anything that has ever been seen in the 



31 

public school system in America. Do you wish to take issue with us on 
that jjroposition ? We claim that, on the trial, we can prove our allega- 
tions beyond question. * 

Your proposition, that the Catholic Church would not educate its 
children in secular as well as Christian knowledge, is absurd, because it 
would show that we would be willing to give up to you all the legitimate 
prizes and enjoyments of life, and make our children hewers of wood 
and drawers of water to you for all time. Now, do not expect people to 
believe that we are quite so stupid as that. But we will settle all dis- 
putes on this question right here. We will stipulate in the amendments 
we ask that no corporate school shall receive its share of the public 
funds, unless it is taught by teachers of the same qualifications as those 
possessed by teachers in public schools of similar character, and unless 
the teaching therein can be shown to be as satisfactory in secular matters 
as that which obtains in public schools of like grade ; and, if you like, 
we will also agree that no such school shall receive any greater amount 
annually for each child taught tlierein than the annual cost for educating 
each child in the public schools, if you will make the agreement recipro- 
cal. Give us a fair chance with you in the matter of money, buildings 
and appliances, and we shall invite comparison, not shun it. We shaU 
be happy to engage in a generous rivalry with you on that point when- 
ever you like. 

CATHOLICITY AND CITIZENSHIP. 

You say again, many of you, "Well, Catholics don't make good 
citizens, anyhow ; they don't acknowledge the unlnnited authority of the 
State, and we don't want to encourage their increase among us. 

1st. We don't ask you to encourage their increase— that will get 
along without your help ; but whence do you draw your right to try to 
prevent it ? Are not all religions free in this country ? Is not the prin- 
ciple of religious liberty the corner-stone of this Eepublic ? Do you 
propose to destroy this government ? 

2d. Gentle Pharisees ! when did you learn to thank God that you 
were better citizens than these other men ? Do you obey the laws more 
faithfully, pay your taxes more regularly, give your lives more freely for 
the maintenance of good government, than these other men ? Since when, 
pray ? Oh, but you say, occasions may arise when these other men will 
not obey the law. And how about yourselves ? Who are the people in 
this country who have talked most about higher law ? What is the law ? 
The will of the majority, simply as a majority, you answer ; the will of 
the majority acting in accordance with divine authority, we reply. 
Between two classes giving such diflferent answers, which one is most 
likely to obey the law when it is, in truth, founded on justice, but is 
repugnant to their feelings and injurious to their personal interests ? 
Those who feel they must obey because they are forced, or those who sub- 
mit from a sense of duty ? If you reject divine authority in government, 



32 

you acknowledge the right of every man, or body of men, to evade or resist 
the law at will. You make the majority a mere mob, which it may be 
wise lor the moment to ol:)ey, lest it crush you, but whose commands you 
have the right to resist by every means in your power ; or, rather, accept 
your doctrine, and there is no longer any such thing as right or wrong 
in anything. By it you abandon the whole idea of moral accountability : 
and yet you have the temerity to claim that, under your theory, men 
would be better citizens than under ours ! 

RIGHTS OF THE CITIZEN AND RIGHTS OP THE STATE. 

Now, a word or two about my third general proposition, and I will 
then close, as I fear I have already trespassed too much upon the good- 
natured patience with which you have so far listened to me. 

In that proposition I maintain that tlie State has no inherent right 
to teach at all. It may assist education, but has no right to control it. 
The distinction between teaching and assisting the teacher is as great 
as that between the architect who designs and directs the construction 
of an edifice, which shall be the wonder of distant ages, and the work- 
men who build it ; or between the musical composer, whose soul rises to 
such heights that he is able to comprehend the music of the spheres and 
transmit it to us t)elow, and the men who play the notes he has written ; 
or between the great artist, under whose skillful touch the pallid canvas 
becomes almost a thing of flesh and blood, with power to chill the heart 
with horror or delight our souls with visions of celestial beauty, and the 
boy who grinds his paints ; or between the poet, who brings all nature 
within his ken and sends his words ringing down the halls of time, and 
the publisher who prints his works and pays his bills. That's the rela- 
tion between the teacher and the State. The true teacher is from God, 
and his brow is ever illuminated by the halo of his divine mission. The 
Stat« is of the earth, earthy. It has its humble office, to minister to the 
physical wants of the teacher, and provide him with the appliances 
necessary for his work. So long as it does this well, let it have due 
commendation ; but, when it presumes to play professor, then ne sutor. 
It may assist ; but control, never I When it undertakes to control educa- 
tion, it interferes with religion, and destroys both civil and religious 
liberty. The plea of necessity will not cover it. It might with greater 
propriety say that some religious belief is necessary to make good 
citizens, and organize a broad church, prescribe its teachings, and say, 
that if people do not attend some other church, they must attend that 
one at least once a week. There is no doubt every good citizen ought 
to attend some church at least once a week ; but has the State a right to 
compel him to do so ? No ! because the concession of that right would 
l)e the destruction of individual liberty. For the same reason, the State 
has no right to attempt compulsory education. There may be no school 
in the vicinity to which a parent can conscientiously send his child ; and 
under such circumstances he may side with Professor Huxley, and say 



he prefers to have his child wait for another opportunity, or, if neces- 
sary, grow up ignorant of both those mighty arts of reading and writing, 
rather than have him imbibe false notions as to his greatest duty on 
earth ; for of all desolation that can come upon a human being, there is 
none so appalling as the gloomy thought that it has no religious faith^ 
no settled idea of the origin or end of its existence, no firm belief as to 
whether it is only an animal, more or less beautiful, more or less intelligent, 
whose fate it is to live, die, rot, and be no more ; or whether it has an 
immortal soul hurrying on to an eternal world, to meet there the great 
God who made all things, and who is waiting, with outstretched arms, 
to receive his wandering child and bless it with an immortal existence^ 
No wonder they, who are in this desolation, look with longing eyes and 
aching hearts upon those who are so fortunate as to possess the priceless 
jewel of religious faith, and cry out m bitterness of soul, Oh ! call it a 
dream, if you will : it is still a beautiful thought, consoling in ail the ills 
of life ; and would to God that 1 could believe it ! No, this claim to the 
absolute control of our domestic affairs is a sacred right which we can- 
not yield to the State, To do it would be to accept the whole doctrine 
of socialism : to proclaim ourselves communists at once ; to maintain that 
there is no such thing as any divine law about anything ; and that there 
is no right whatever which can be lawfully asserted against the will of 
the majority. This is one of those terrible necessary consequences again. 
When you say the State is supreme in everything, you declare that, in 
this country, a bare majority of the people may change at will the whole 
social order in respect to every possible thing which may be imagined. 
There is a great diflerence between having the power to do a thing and 
having the right to do it. You may have numbers enough to give you 
the physical jDower to do anything you like, but the inherent right to do 
it is another thing. 

When you once admit the paramount right of the State to control the 
individual in matters of conscience, you give up the whole principle of 
individual liberty. You not merely open the door to fiirther encroach- 
ments, you tear the door from its fastenings — nay, you destroy the whole 
edifice ; you level all things before the advancing power of the State.; 
you say to all men there is no God but the majority, no law but the law 
of numbers ; gain your majority, and all things are at your mercy — life, 
liberty and property. When you admit that the State may enter the 
sacred precincts of home and tear your child from your arms to train it 
and teach it as it likes because a majority desire to do so, then you also 
admit to them that you have no right of any kind in your wife or daugh- 
ters which they are bound to respect ; you admit that this majority may, 
against your will, dissolve all domestic ties, and call upon the members 
of your family to submit to whatever outrages any wild, insane majority 
may choose to order; you admit that they may institute whatever of an- 
cient Pagan rites they please, and compel your wives and daughters to 
submit to them. Are you ready for the laws of Lycurgus ? Are you 



34 

read J' to say the Stute may indicate* to you wliich particular child you 
shall strangle in its cradle because the official physician declares that its 
physicial development is not satisfactory to the State ? Are you willing 
to say that the State may limit the amount of property you may own, 
the kind of house you may build, tlie clothes you shall wear, the food 
you shall eat, the opinions you shall entertain, the faith you shall hold, 
the woman you may marry, the wife you may keep ? Are you ready to 
put yourself under the control of every communistic, socialistic agitator 
who may choose to incite the multitude against you ? Are you ready to 
deny God, destroy society, and send everything headlong to the devil? 
How can you say nobedy will try to do any of these things? Wha*-. is 
it restrains them from doing it now ? Two things. First, the lingering 
effects of a recognition of the divine law, for which law you now pro- 
pose to substitute the will of the majority ; second, 1he fact that the doc- 
trine has not yet been declared that there is no individual liberty. But 
once admit the exclusive and absolute authority of the State in all 
things, or in anything which violates the liberty of conscience, and you 
sever every bond which holds society together. You make the mad 
orgie of the Commune days of Paris the normal state of our existence, 
and bring down upon us political anarchy, social chaos, and universal 
ruin. 

CONCLUSION. 

We submit our propositions. Will you argue them, or will you not ? 
You have the power to say in what forum this issue shall be determined. 
The issue is made and must be met. Repressive measures cannot last 
forever in a free Republic. Why not discard the old tyrannical idea of 
force, and examine and dispose of this matter in the calm, clear light of 
reason ? Why not take a statesman-like view of this tremendous conflict 
of opinion ? Why not recognize that it does exist, has existed, and prob- 
abl}'- always will exist? Why not take it up and settle it in such a way 
that no one hereafter can have good reason to disturb it ? There is no 
difficulty about it. The problem has been solved. The work has been 
half done already ; we have only to complete it. The Church, after 
infinite struggle, has been set free. All thai remains to finaily, com- 
pletely, and satisfactorily dispose of the whole matter is, to do for the 
school what you have done for the Church — that is, give freedom of in- 
struction to all. The manner of supporting the school or the Church is 
a matter of detail, not of principle — a matter of tax or no tax, which you 
may arrange in either case as you wish, so long as you give each man his 
due ; but the freedom of teaching is a vital principle, as to .which both 
the Church and the school stand on the same footing. The two are in- 
separable, and the work is only half done while either is enslaved. You 
liave no right to make a broad church, to which all parents must go ; 
neither can you, in right, establish a broad school, which all children 
must attend, for the sdiool is the church of the children, and the 'Church 



35 

is the school for tlie parents. So long as man shall exist, this conflict of 
opinion may endure. You can have peace on this question in but 
one of two ways, either by abolishiui^ religious beliet, or by conciliating 
it. Even if you could abolish it, how long would your social organiza- 
tion last ? Not twentj-four hours ! But we cannot hope to abolish it, 
and we dare not if we could. There is but one way left, and that is to 
conciliate it. "We must labor at our laws until we get them in such shape 
that no considerable body of our people can honestly claim that they are 
the victims of a rank injustice ; and of all questions on which it is neces- 
sary to be calm, considerate and just, this question of religious convic- 
tions and religious rights is the most important. Unsettled questions 
in this matter have, above all others, no mercy for the peace of mankind. 
Like the accusing vision of the murdered Banquo, they will not down. 
Why not cast aside the errors of the past, and set a bright example for 
the future ? "We are gathered together here from all jjarts of the globe. 
"We are laying now the foundations for a future State. Let us lay them 
broad and deep — broad enough to cover every shade of religious belief, 
and so deeply planted in the principles of justice that they may stand 
forever. Let us set down upon our stat^ite books a law which shall de- 
clare, in truth as well as in words, that civil and religious liberty is 
here fully guaranteed to all men ; that here all men may be, indeed, 
truly free. 

(end op the lecture.) 

[See proposed School Bill on following pages.] 



APPENDIX 



The following is a copy of the hill introduced in the Legis- 
lature a few days after the delivery of the foregoing lecture, 
and which was defeated in the Council by one vote only : 

AN ACT TO PROVIDE FOR CORPORATIONS FOR EDUCATIONAL 
PURPOSES. 

Be it enacted by the LegisLatim Assembly of the Territory of Arizona : 

Sec. 1. That any ten or more persons, residents in any county of tins Ter- 
ritory, may, at will, form themselves iato a corporation for educational pur- 
poses. 

Sec. 2. Such persons shall make and subscribe written articles of incorpo- 
ration in triplicate, and acknowledge the same before any officer authorized to 
take the acknowledgment of a deed, and file one of such articles in the office 
of the Secretary of the Territory, another with the County Recorder of the 
County of which the incoiporators are resident, and retain the third in the 
possession of the incorporation. 

Sec. 3. The articles of incorporation, or a certified copy of the one filed 
with the Secretary of the Territory or the County Recorder, is evidence of the 
existence of such corporation. 

Sec. 4. The articles of incorporation shall specify, first, the name assumed 
by the corporation and by which it shall be known ; second, the duration of 
the corporation ; third, its object ; fourth, the place of formation and the 
county in which it proposes to carry on the business of the corporntion. 

Sec. 5. - Upon the making and filing of the articles of incorporation as 
herein provided, the persons subscribing the same are corporators, authorized 
to carry into effect the object specified in the articles, and they, and all per- 
sons who may hereafter become associated with them as members of said 
corporation, in accordance with the by-laws of said corporation, shall there- 
after by the name assumed in such articles, be deemed a body corporate, 
with power — 

1st. To sue and be sued. 

3d. To contract and be contracted with. 

'Sd. To have and to use a corporate seal, and the same to alter at pleasure, 

4th. To purchase, possess and dispose of such real and personal property 
as may be necessary and convenient to carrj*- into effect the object of the 
corporation. .- 

5th. To appoint such officers and agents as the* business of the corporation, 
may require, and prescribe their duties and compensation. 



:)8 

6th. To have and exercise all tlie rights, privileges and powers necessary 
and proper for carrying out the object of such corporation. 

7th. To have the power to form a constitution and adopt by-laws, for its 
government, so far as they do not conflict with the Constitution and laws of 
the United States or the laws ol this Territory; and all schools established by 
any corporation formed under the provisions of this Act shall, in all things, be 
under the exclusive control and management of such corporation. 

Sec. 6. Whenever any person is called upon to pay any tax or fine levied 
by any competent authority for educational purposes, if he pay such tax or 
fine, the money so paid by him shall be devoted us follows : 

1st. If he make no request as to any special disposition of such tax or fine 
so paid, it shall go to the benefit of the general public school fund as is now 
or may liereafter be provided for public school monej's as distinguished from 
corporate school moneys. 

2d. If he direct that the whole or any portion of the amcmnt of his tax or 
fine so paid, whether it be territorial, or county, or district or any other tax or 
fine for educational jDurposes, be p;ad to any educational corporation formed 
under the provisions of this Act, then the amount of such tax or fine so desig- 
nated as to be paid to such corporation shall be paid to such corporation. 

Sec. 7. All receipts for taxes or fines paid, which include a tax or fine for 
educational purposes, shull specify the amount of such educational tax or fine 
paid, and what order was made by the payer as to the distribution of the tax 
or fine so paid. 

Sec. 8. It shall not be necessary that the educational corporation, to w-hich 
the tax-payer desires his educational tax or fine to go, shall be specified 
by him in a technically correct manner ; but, if it appear from his designation 
that lie desired it to be diverted from the ordinary public school fund to some 
corporation formed under this .Act, and it can be reasonably ascertained from 
his designation to which corporation he intended it to go, it shall go to svich 
corporation ; but in all cases where it is clear beyond a reasonable doubt that 
the intention of the payer cannot be ascertained, then the money so paid shall 
go to the general public school fund. 

Sec. 0. It shall be the duty of every collector or receiver of any educa- 
tional tax or fine to inform the person paying such tax or fine, at the time the 
same is received, that he may designate whether he wishes such educational 
tax or fine to be given to the general public school fund, or to any particular 
corporation formed under this Act, and that it must be paid in the manner he 
directs ; and every failure of any such officer to fairly and substantially com- 
ply with this provision .shall subject the officer so failing to a fine of $dO and 
costs of the proceeding. The proceeding may be instituted by any person ; and 
all fines adjudged shall be paid to the school fund of the county, as designated 
by the prosecutor in such proceeding, in the same manner as if the amount of 
the fine was an educational tax, to be paid by the said prosecutor. 

Sec. 10. A corporation formed under this Act may establish one or more 
schools in the county where the corporation proposes to act. 

Sec. 11. Any corporation formed under this Act shall be entitled to the 
writ of mandamus, as in other cases by the laws of this Territory provided, to- 
compel any officer otherwise failing, neglecting or refusing to properly comply 
with the provisions of this Act. 

Sec. 13. The District Courts established in this Territory, whether holding 
sessions as established by laws of the United States or by the laws of this 
Territory, shall have exclusive original jvirisdiction of all alleged violations of 
this Act regardless of the amount involved in the controversy ; and the 



3!) 

Suijrenie Court of tins Territory sliall have jurisdiction of all appeals from 
'said District Courts in cases arising under this Act ; and all of said Courts, in 
the consideration of such cases shall be governed by the rules of proceeding 
■established for said Courts in civil cases. 

Sec. 13. No portion of any school moneys so paid to any corporation 
formed under the provisions of this Act shall be devoted to any other than 
educational purposes, and to no other educational purposes than the education 
of children between the ages of six years and twenty-one yoars, and for the 
ordinary purposes of life. 

Sec. 14. Any corporation substantially violating the provisions of the last 
preceding section shall forfeit its right to receive any moneys appropriated to 
it during the school year in which any such violation is adjudged by the 
courts to have occurred, and the money so forfeited by such corporation shall 
be appropriated to the general public school fund. 

Sec. 15. All salaries provided by law to be paid to any Territorial or County 
Superintendent of Public Instruction shall be paid out of the general fund of 
the Territory or county, and not out of the school fund. 

Sec. 16. It shall be the duty of the County Treasurer of each countj- — 

1st. To receive and hold as a special fund all moneys paid into the Treasury 
to the credit of any corporation formed under this Act, whether received by 
him as territorial, county or district tax, or from any other source, and to 
keep a separate account thereof with each of such corporations and of the dis- 
bursements of such moneys. , | 

2d. On the first Monday of January, April, July and October of each year, 
he shall notify each of such corporations in his county of the amount of money 
in his possession to the credit of such corporation from all sources received . 

8d. He shall pay over to each of such corporations, on the warrant of the 
president of such corporation countersigned by the secretary, any or all of 
said moneys from whatever source received . 

4th. He .shall not transmit to the Territorial Treasurer any moneys paid to 
the credit of any corporation in his county formed under this Act, but shall 
pay all of said moneys directly to such corporation, as provided in this Act. 

5th. In makirig his annual report to the Territorial Treasurer, he shall re- 
port all moneys received by him for the credit of corporations formed under 
this Act, and of the disbursements of the same. 

Sec 17. The Territorial Treasurer, in his annuil report, slull make a sep- 
arate statement of all moneys reported to him by the County Treasurer as 
received to the credit of corporations formed under this Act, and of the dis- 
bursements of the same . 

Sec. 18. All corpor?.tions formed under this Act shall make an annual 
report to the Territorial Superintendent of Public Instruction at the same 
time that the County Superintendents of Public Instruction are recjuired to 
report to the said office:-. Such i-eports shall set forth — ■ 

1st. The amount of moneys received during the previous fiscal school year 
from the County Treasurer ; 

2d. The disjjosition mide of the same; 

-5d. The number of schools established by such corporation; 

4th . The number of days each of said schools have been in ses.sion during 
such year ; 



40 

5th . The total number of pupils admitted in each of said schools ; 

6th . The daily average attendance in each of said schools during the time 
the same was in session ; 

7th. The number of teachers employed in each of said schools ; 

8th . The average cost per day of educating a pupil in the schools estab- 
lished by such corporation ; 

9th. Any statements, suggestions or recommendations such corporation 
may choose to make on the subject of education. 

Sec. 19. The Territorial Superintendent of Public Instruction, in hin 
annual report to the Territorial Board of Education, shall transmit a full and 
correct copy of the reports of all such corporations, which shall be considered 
a part of and published with his report ; and he shall be allowed twenty cents 
per folio of one hundred words for the copying of said report, to be paid out 
of the General Fund of the Territory by the Territorial Treasurer upon the 
warrant of the Territorial Board of Education . 

Sec. 20. All lots, buildings or other school property, owned by any cor- 
poration formed under this Act, and devoted to the legitimate purposes of 
such corporation, shall be and the same are exempt from taxation and from 
sale under execution, or other writ or order, in the nature of an execution. 

Sec. 21 . All schools established by any corporation formed under this Act 
shall be known as corporate schools, as distinguished from public schools. 

Skc. 22. Section 34: of the Act entitled an Act to establish public schools 
in the Territory of Arizona, approved February Ibth, 1871, forbiddins;- the 
giving of public money to schools where religous instruction is given, so far 
as the same is in conflict with this Act, and all Acts and parts of Acts in 
conflict with the provisions of this Act, are repealed, so far as they conflict 
with this Act. 

Sec. 23. This Act shall take effect and be in force from and after its pas- 
sage, and thill apply only to Pima county, of this Territory . 



N. B — Any person reading this bill, who considers he observes any defect 
or any objectionable matter therein, will confer a favor by communicating his 
opinion thereon to the Right Revekknd J. B. Salpointe, Tucson, Arizona- 
Territory . 



AND 



PUBLISHED EVERY SATURDAY AT 

IVo. 37 BARCLAY STREET, ISEW YORK. 



TERMS, PAYABLE IN ADVANCE. 



There are a great many local Catholic papers that 
have been started, in the last few years. Some of them are 
admirable, and calculated to do much good. But it is, for 
any of these, impossible, to supply the place of the Freeman's 
Journal^ with its extensive production of the liveliest trans- 
lations of most important and instructive documents, and 
information, from all parts of ChristendouL There is no 
Catholic Journal published in the English language that 
supplies so much of the raciest and most instruct! v^e docu- 
ments of the finest Catholic minds, in translations from all 
languages, as the .Freeman's Journal does. This communion 
of thoughts and works, drawn from the best living Catholic 
writers, of all countries, in regard to questions palpitating 
"with interest for all Catholics, ought not to be neglected by 
Catholics that wish to be alive to the works that Grod is 
carrying on among Catholics everywhere. 



BY MAIL IN THE UNITED STATES. 

Single Subacribers, one year $;j 00 

" " six month i 150 

Six copies for '. 15 00 

Ten copies for 22 50 

Twenty copies for 40 00 

BY MAIL TO FOREIGN COUNTRIES. 

Single Subscribers, one year $3 00— postage extra. 

Six copies, one year IS 00— postage extra. 

BY CARRIERS. 

In New York aud Brooklyn, one year .t4 00 

^ Wholesale Dealers, per one hundred copies '4 00 

RATES OF ADVERTISING; 

Reading Notices, each insertion, per line 40 

Special Notices, " " 30 

Transient Advertisements, each insertion, per line 25 

Yearly Advertisements, per line 12 

I^T* Remittances should be sent 1>y Draft, Post>Office Order, or iu 
Reg'istered Letter. 

■3" All Communications .should be addressed— 

NEW YORK FREEMAN'S JOURNAL, 
JAMES A. McMASTER, Editor and Proprietor. NEIV YORK. 



FR. PUSTET, 

(KNIGHT OF THE ORDER OF ST. GREGORY, AND PRINTER OF THE HOLY 
APOSTOLIC SEE.) 

Pitiler ait Biilseller, 

Regensburg, (Bavaria.) 



52 BARCLAY STREET. 

ciisr oiisr 3sr.A.Ti, 
204 VINE STREET.. 

IiyiPORTER OF 

VESTMENTS, STATUES, &e. 

AND SOLE AGENT FOR 

MAYR'S ARTISTIC INSTITUTE, MUNICH. 



Represented in IVew York by 

A. DIEPENBROCK, 



E. STEINBACK. 



WM. H. O'DWYER, 

Attorney and Counsellor at Law, 
No. 93 NASSAU STREET, 

(Bennett Building,) NEW YORK CITY. 



ANNOUNCEMENT! 



The Scliool Question. 



THOMAS D. EGAN, 

THE FXIBLISHER, OF THIS IL.KCTUJRE, 

OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS; 

ABE THEY FREE FOR ALL. OR ARE THEY NOT? 

by Hon. Edmund F. Dunne, Chief Justice of the Supreme 
Court of Arizona, announces that he is prepared to receive 
orders for anything published, or that may hereafter be pub- 
lished on this important question. 

m RiEM Rey. B. J. McOUAlD, Bistiop of Rocliesler, 

says of this question : " The discussion is only at its 
beginning." 

Publishers, Newsdealers, Religious Societies or Clergy- 
men ordering in large numbers will be allowed a liberal 
discount. 

Suggestions, facts or anything bearing on this subject 
will be thankfully received, if forwarded to 

THOMAS D. EGAN, 

New York Catholic Agency, 

37 BARCLAY STREET, New York. 



PKICE TEN CE!VTS. 



OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS : 



ARE THEY FREE FOR ALL, OR ARE THEY NOT? 



A LECTURE 

DELIVERED BY 

HON. EDMUND F. DUNNE, 

Chief Justice of the Supbeme Court of Arizona, 
in the ha.ll of the house of representatives of the territorial 

LEGISLATURE AT TUCSON, ARIZONA, FEBRUARY 2d, 1875. 



SKCOND EDITION, 



NEW YORK : 

Published by THOS, D. EG AN, 37 Barclay Street. 

1875. 



New York Catholic Agency. 



THOMAS D. EGAN 

Has the honor of announcing to his friends and the public in general, 
that he has established an agency for the convenience of Clergymen, 
Heads of Colleges, Academies, Schools, and private individuals who may 
desire anything in their respective lines, that is manufactured in this 
country or Europe, All orders addressed to him at 37 Barclay Street^ 
New York, will be promptly attended to. 

Among other things, the Agency is prepared to supply Family 
Bibles, Prayer Books, all the latest Publications and Pamphlets* 
Chukch Ornaments and Religious Objects, such as Ckucipixes, 
Beads, Pictures, Wax Candles, and Pure Olive Oil for the Sanc- 
tuary, and Society Goods, such as Regalias, Scarfs, Badges, 
Banners, Trimmings, &c., and all other articles that may be desired, at 
the shortest notice and on the most accommodating terms. 

Subscriptions will be taken for the New Yo7'h Freeman's Journal, the 
New Torh Tablet, the Catholic Review, the Qatholic World, an excellent 
Catholic monthly magazine, and all other publications of the kind issued 
in this country or Europe. 

Advertisements will be inserted in any of the above mentioned, 
or other publications at the lowest rates. 

Book, Card and Job Printing and Book Binding of every 
description will be executed at trade prices, and forwarded to destination 
without delay and icithout extra charge. 

All remittances should be made by Post- Office Money Order or 
Registered Letter, addressed to Thomas D. Egan, 37 Barclay Street, 
New York. 

" The American Catholic Quarterly Review, " ( a new 
Publication, the first number of which will appear on January 1st, 1876,) 
edited by Very Rev. James A. Corcoran, D.D., Very Rev. James 
O'Connor, D.D., and Dr. O. A. Brownson, and including among its Corps 
of Contributors, such learned theologians as the Rt. Rev. P. N. Lynch, 
D.D., Bishop of Charleston ; Rt. Rev. Thomas A. Becker, D.D., Bishop 
of Wilmington, Del., and others. Can also be obtained on application 
to this agency. Price, |5.00 per annum. 

The N. Y. Catholic Agency makes a special feature of publishing 
the grand lecture entitled '^Our Public Schools; are they free for all, or are 
they not/" by the Hon. Edmund F. Dunne, Chief Justice of Arizona, and 
all other publications that may hereafter appear on this subject. 

THOS. D. EGAN, 

37 BAliCLAT STREET. 



*'What Paper Shall We Take This Year?" 



This question has doubtless been put to you recently. It is one of no trifling impor- 
tance to yourself, your fiimily, and to your country. Happily or unhappily, the newspaper 
has become a part of our daily life. Our own conduct, the religious tone of our family, 
our devotion to our Church and country, will be sensibly .affected by what we read week 
after week. 

You will of course take a paper which defends the Catholic side in the terrible contro- 
V."--- that is now waging against the Church. 

These are not the times when any one who has a love for the old faith should be igno- 
rant of what is done against the Catholic Church ; of what her zealous children j'n all parts 
of tl ■ world .ire doing to advance her cause; of what they have to say in her defense 
agai) t M,asons, Know-Nothiiigs, Kaisers and Red Republicans ; and of what we ought to 
do foi lier. The secular papers will not tell you this. You must, therefore, if you want to 
be pos od, take some of the Catholic papers. 

It may be that you are taking one already, and that you can afford to take another ; or 
that that which you have hitherto patronized has disappointed you : or that you have not 
yet subscribed for any. In that case we ask you to examine leisurely what the conductors of 
the Catholic Review have to say for themselves, or, to be more accurate, what the Catholic 
press, prelates and people have said in praise of the Catholic Review. If you are sat- 
isfied that they are working in the right direction give them a trial of one year or of 
four months. 

If any paper deserves a fair trial it surely is a paper of which the Cabpinal Arch- 
bishop OF New York is an " attentive reader," and -H'hich " it gives him pleasure to say is 
an excellent auxiliary to the good cause." Which the Cardinal Abchbishop or Dublin 
believes is " well calculated to render great services to the Catholic Church." Which the 
Bishop of Providence thinks " indispensableto a Catholic for its clever defense of our 
grand old reliuibn." Which the Bishop of Mobile affirms " fills a want long felt." Which 
the Bishop of Buooklyn is persuaded " will continue to enjoy the confidence of its pa- 
trons, and will instruct and edify them." Which the Bishop of Charleston, the Bishops 
of Hartford, Wheeling, Portland, Arizona, and numerous other sees in Europe. Asia and 
America, in different words and at different times, but with special warmth and uniform 
agreement, have declared worthy of Catholic support. 

Sueh a paper is llie Catholic Review. 

It, and it only, has received such praise. No other Catholic paper in the; English speak- 
ing world can point to such a record ! ' 

Will you sustain it by your subscriptions .' 

K^ Every subscriber helps it forward to the day when it will start a Catholic daily. 

THE 

CATHOLIC REVIEW. 

A Weekly Newspaper suitable for Sunday Reading in Catholic Families, Commended to 
the Faithful by Many Bishops, Archbishops and Cardinals. 

VOL. IX & X. BEGIN' JANUARY AND JULY, 1876. .SIX CENTS. 

1. Topics of the Hour. j 12. The Lives of Catholic Workers, Whose 

2. American Catholic News. E.tample will Suggest Iiaitation. 

3. Foreign Sketches and Letters. \ 13. Portraits ami Biographies of Eminent 

4. Rome and the Holy Father. | Living Catholics. 

5. Ireland and Her Works. | 14. Pictures of Catholic Works— such as tlid 

6. Fighting the Fight of Faith in England. Great Cathedrals of Europe. 

7. Literature and Stories. | 15. Art Supplements, being the Free Gift of 

8. Editorials on Questions of the Day. I Beautiful CathoHc Pictures suitable for 
19. Notesfor the Family, etc., etc. | Framing. The price of one of these Pic- 

10. Sermons by Father Burke, Archbishop I tures, if purchased in an art store, i^ 

Manning, and other Great Preachers. | worth a whole year's subscription. 

11. Historical Sketches showing the Glory I 

of the Catholic Church, and Her Work | 
for Learning, Art and Civilization. , 
PRICE, $3 00 PER YEAR. $1 50 FOR SIX MONTHS. ON TRIAL, $1 00 FOUR 
MONTHS. Add postage at the rate of 20 cents a year. Very large reduction to clubs. 
THE CHEAPEST, HANDSOMEST AND BEST, 

ADDRESS P. V. HICKEY, Catholic Review, 

BOX 3166, 37 Park Row, Kew York. 

!K5" If you want a Catholic book and know the price, send us the price and we will 
send you thp book. 

OJ&^Send a stamp for a copy of Father iom Burke's sermon, "WHY IREL.^ND 
IS CATHOLIC." 



FRELIGH'S REMEDY 

CURES 

RHEUMATISM, NEURALGIA, G0;T, 



AND 



NERVOUS HBADAOr k 

An internal remedy, which eradicates the cause of these di'- ^rom the 

system. Carefully prepared from the prescription of an eminp jian, by 



S. O. A. MURPIi 



SUCCESSOR TO 



HIND & MURPHY, Wholesale Hru ists, 

NO. 81 BAECLAY STREET, NEW YOR) i 



Ip^- If IOUB DkTJGOIST does not keep it, it will be FOBWAJBDED C yvECEIPT 

or One Dollar. 



i 

St. Malachi's Chcri \ 

ArUngton, Mags., April 15th, J875. \ 
Mfsgrs. Hind & Murphy : BeBides the benefit I have derived, under God's blessing, 
from the use of Freligh's Remedy, I have wiuiessed remarkable effects of ita curiiig 
qualities, in those who have carefully and regularly used it, both n my household, 
and amongst poor people of my mission to whom I have given it. A suffer-T troi 
Rheumatism for the last twenty-fiv years, this i' the first time I have given my te 
timony in behalf of any remedy, and— unsolicited. »v 

Respectfully, Joseph M. Fino tv n 

La Salle College, 
PhUadelphia, N'v. 15, 18; les 
Mes-im. Hind & Murphy . In response to your favor just received, permit me j.pg 
that several of our Brothers, suffering from 'Searalqm have been g ea ly reiie ^ 
the use of Frdigh's Remedy, and thf-y speak highly in its favor. 

Yours respectfully BBorHEB No 

Abebdees, Miss., March 14, 187,, 
3i..s.s/-.s. Hind & Murphy : Enclosed you will hnd five dollars, for value of win a 
please send Freligh's Remedy. I suffered very much from Neuralgia whi.e in Ne .v 
York recently, and found myself much benefitted by it I would like (o lotrodiice it 
into rav practice RespectfuUy W. A. Evans, M.D. 

AU8TIV, Texas, Sept. 6, 1873 
Messrs Hind <fc Murphy : I have been troubled with Chronic Rheumatism for ab()ui. 
two years, and could get no help. I used one bottle of youi Freligh's Remedy, a d I 
am happy to tell you that I am entirelv cured. 

CHARLbS Behnke, ' ougress Aveime 
San Fba.n CISCO, Aug. 20. 1874. 
Messrs Hind <fc Mnrphy • Gents— I have had the Rheumatism in the bnck^ uid limba 
for five years, and nothing has done mo ny go d but o e bottle of Frei gh's eni.dy 
from you. Sond ine. bv VVoUs & Fargo's Express oue doze i bottles, andl wi 1 ]j;iy on 
doliveVy . I will introduce tlie medicine here, s tHorn urc a number of people ti'oublea 
with Rheumatism and other p ins Yours truly, „, . 

James L. Kane, S. W. cor. Jackson and Kearney Street . 



3 


>. I3> _, ..'i 


^ . 


:■> 3 


"^'f 


> 


^^ !5S^ 


-^^ 


3S 


c>- ' I3> "';^;: 


> 


""~)\: 


==r:^i 


> 


^^ • 


" 1^ 




s ^ ^ 




3> 




"""^ ^ 


> 

> 


X-?.ts'., 




^p.: 




> 


'" 


-^ i=i 


^ 








iJi* 


"Vv ,) )> 


> 


- 


~3 " 


i3> i) >)33t> 


:^ 


'^?::>'l 


IIII^>^ 


, >"'• ■> '•') _ 


^ 


- - 


— ^ 


t:^i3 ^^3>^ 


^'^ 


B>1 


^ 




> 
> 


- 




1 


j?c>^ ^--i^L- 




^ 2-f 


^ 






S~ 




5 








^ 


>-:>::x>: 


:> 


s 




"^f "' 


->i>^^^''-^^ 




i y') 


l:>-' 


^j^.-^ 


> 


^^^& 


► ^-^ 


=-?- 


,, ^ 


2> _^ 


:>^ :^ 




r-> 




:> 

:> ^ 












> 




:x>: 


^ 


3> i>^ ::^ 


:> 


3^ ^ 


^y- 










^y^:^ t^ 






"I^"^'^ 


!>:> - 


:> 


^j>. 


^JX> 


__^_._ ^ ■ 


;>>> ^^y^Ji^ 




r=> ^ 


"n»"^^- > ' 


^>^ 


>> 


> 


2> 


s> 


y:>:z>j> ::^ 


£> 






r-^— *^' -= 


>i 


> 


:>^ 


r> 




X> 


^Z 

~~~^ 


— ^ 


~>^ '" 




> 

> _ 


^ 


3 


^:> z^yi> .--> 


> 


I^- ^== 


^o^" 




:>i 


>: 


>:> 


> 


o^i>^ :::^ 


> s> 


^"^^ ■' 


—"^ - 


>J-> 


:>: 


> _ 


>z> 


^ 


• _:> Z> >2> ^ 


''i^ .. 


^r^ '" 




>IS3^ 


>^; 


> z 


>i> 


^ 


'i>II>2l>' -= 


* y _ 


W^M 


>^^^ 




>:) 


^^ 


►.:> 


y_ 






^M 




?^ 




z> 


— — ,^ 


;:> 






y^/^ 


> ::> 


:&3> - 


:>:> 


j:> 


' ^ 


^'^' 


''^'^* ^ :> 5~^ ■ > "^ 


> "~^ 


i^^ "z 


>i^:>. 


§X^ 


>>_ 


^ 


^^. 


> z 




' * 


^ 










.:S 


P ^ 






d^ ^ 


>:ir>: 


.K>^:> 


jy> 


3> 


-^^^ -L_> 


► ' 


^ 


^BT^H 




>:">r^2!^ 


jj»r 


:> 


; > _> 


1 ' > 




— ^ - 


^-d^ 


'5r~)^ 


S:>::»^ 


::^ 


:^ 


>0 


» I: 


[> >)J> >>- 


er> "^t> 


^ix>:^ 


L> 


[>: 


:>>:>•: 


r3>__5» ': 


®z> 


►i>Z>^ 


!i>>lS^ 


c^ 


:::2>A 


>->^_l 


> 


;>3>r^'-3> Z^ 


^ 


s>z> 


•:jr:>"^ 


>^ ^^ 


Ti^" 


>:> :.^ 


8> r»'~" 


> VJ> 


I>i> >Z> 


^ 


sn: 


>^1E>: 


i>j>":^^ 


\2>'l 


>F" 


:>^r>i^^>:^ 


.- — .^ 


»T>-~" 


> >>:l 


3>:>^ 


^ > 


'">'■: 


J^3^^ 


^3 


r>z>i>=^ 


^'Z> 

^ 


>3>^" 


>>> 


:i^"^:-^ 


'i^i 


).'-^^ 


~ife^^ 




^^~^SG>.. 


->I^ 









^ 


> 


a^^_-^ 


w _^^ ■- _ -^ 


h 


> 


:>i> z: 


^ _JlI^ '''" ''^ ^-^ 




":> 


Z>J> ^ 


> .l>.->a>.I 


W 




z>j> z: 


> F>:>^ . 


> 


.-^ 
-> 






^ 


> 


r>> ^ 


~Sr>:>J»'^>' - 


^H 


^ 


:>:> ^ 


■:>^S30»^ 


> ' 


T) 


5i> r 


~>::^^-3l 


> 


3> 


:>j> I 


>:3':>=§' 


> 


:> 1_ 


^ 1 


>E2>^^ 


> 


D ^ 


:xi> 


:> 3*::>2> 


> 


> _ 


>j> : 


:>:3>»^ 


> 


> -^ ^ 


> > 


:>:~i>:^> 


X^ 




:>:x>^> 


► J 


'"'"^ 


IIZ>" ' •- 


>^^^^ 


>9 




>i7> 


o:3>Ji^ 


:».> 
'^:> 


~2^ 


^v: 






_^- — -^ 


§ 


. J>.-^-*^^^ Jt-^^^ 


> 




rr> 


j;>_>:v3>U^'.i^ 


' > ' 


T> 


>1> 


-XXOl>"H> 


>"^ 


3> 


:o> 


^SpOI>.'2E] 


>^; 


z> 


>T> 


;j>5'0^ ■ "^ 


:3):_ 


•:>: 


>:5;z> 


3>g;i>>'i^ 


;■■) 


^ 


3s:> 


'3Si>:'3: 




:> 


^t>:> 


''"ii€>;> >>■ 




o> 


^5:> ;:^x:i^ 



> 5^^ 



?^ 















